Not that anyone asked me, but...

Caught a tidbit on the news this morning about California and the battle there over Proposition 8 which, if passed, would take away the rights of gays and lesbians in the state to marry. And, since I'm feeling a bit frisky today, I figured I'd write about something that matters.

Here is the text California voters will see on their ballots in 15 days:

"ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California. Provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Fiscal Impact: Over next few years, potential revenue loss, mainly sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars, to state and local governments. In the long run, likely little fiscal impact on state and local governments."

Now, I don't know about you, but this kinda sticks in my craw. Even though I can't vote on it, there are many reasons I'm against Prop 8, the biggest one is it's just plain wrong. So, for my little section of the blogosphere, I found this for my virtual front lawn:

As I was searching around for this sign, I came across this...I think it's a blog, but there isn't much there except a picture of very boring looking family and the commentary below, which I'm reproducing verbatim:

"Help Protect our families and marrige between a man and a women


We here in California are in for a big fight that we cant let satin win and thats the value of the family, they are trying to pass a law that will legalize gay marriages. As a member of the church I feel very strongly about the family unit and that marriage is only to be between a man and women, we are in for a fight but we are pressing forward with the direction of the presidency of the church to go door to door and stand for what is true and right."

Let's critique, shall we?

The first problem I see is whoever wrote this should learn how to spell marriage before they go out fighting to protect it. Proof positive that while you need to take a test to drive a car or own a handgun (in most jurisdictions), any idiot can get married.

Second, I don't really think satin poses that much of a danger to the American way of life. Of course, there was that time back in '92 when my friend Pip came back to Gitmo after a week's leave with a giant knot on his forehead. It was the tragic result of an unwise combination of silk boxers and a high-speed dive onto a bed covered with satin sheets.

And, finally, while the author is obviously against gay marriage, he apparently has nothing against plural marriage. He said it not once, but twice: a man and women. Seems a little unfair to me. He gets to marry more than one woman, but Bob down the street can't marry Jerry? Bigot.

Most of all, my problem with Prop 8 is government has no business fucking around with marriage in the first place. Marriage is first, last and always a religious ceremony and, if memory serves me, the 1st Amendment prohibits the government from messing around or supporting any religion.

But, for the sake of argument (and you know I love a good argument) there are several Episcopal churches currently marrying gays and lesbians. How can the government recognize the validity of the vows taken by a man and a woman at, say, 11 a.m. on a particular Saturday, but not those of two women taken in the same church three hours later?

Marriage is none of the governments' business and governments need to get the hell out of peoples' lives when it comes to matters of the heart.