Forewarning: This blog has some borderline anti-religious ideas in it. If you are offended by this, please don't read, and if you do, and feel that what i said is a grave misrepresentation of the truth, please either leave a comment, or PM me so i can possibly rectify the problem
Unfortunately, there are a lot of people, especially on this website, that will probably feel this way so i am going to have no one to debate this with, but here goes my rant
The government is wasting a lot of time, money, and effort debating whether gay couples should be allowed marriage. Here is my question... What in the lack of god's name gave the government the idea it had the power to decide who we can love, and, at a more basic level, have sex with.
As far as i know, at least in the US, the fighting over whether gay marriage can happen or not has a lot to do with the religious folks, stating that homosexuality is against the principles of the Christian (and im sure there are others) religion. I have a few problems with this. My main problem... what ever happened to separation of church and state. What scares me is the impact that religious ideals have on the actions of our governments. religion is a belief system, and a belief system is a horrible thing to base laws on. Laws govern the way people have to live (so does religion to a point, but effect vastly more people). not everyone is religious, and therefore, not everyone should be forced to live under the doctrines of how people think "god" thinks we should be living.
My second problem, who does the government think they are. Why do they think they have the ability to control emotional aspects of our lives. If the government is able to control who we love, what emotions are they going to stop at next. If anyone has ever read 1984, you can make a tangible connection. The people of that imaginative dystopian society are basically brainwashed from the time they are born. The government controls who they like, who they hate, etc. etc. If our government says, men cannot sexual love men, and women women, than what will be their next step. You must eat this food, and drink this drink? You must read this, and not read that? Thinking about it gives me the creeps
My third qualm is, who do people think they are. Those who are lobbying against gay marriages.. why do they think that they should be able to affect the private lives of gays/lesbians. Marriage, love, sex, all these things are private affairs (marriage itself, not the ceremony) How is saying, "You can't legally marry that man!" different from "you can't read that book, you can't gain insight on this ideal, etc."
I just finished 1984, and really, the similarities are astounding. What people have the audacity to claim is their right is starting to seriously scare me
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
...but I'd say we're quite a while away from the world in Orwell's 1984. I would, however, wholeheartedly agree with your point about separation of church and state. In regards to the government, as I said we're not nearing 1984-mode and I think that the system of checks and balances within the U.S. gov't at least will keep us from it. Also, I don't think that the gov't is attempting to brainwash us. The reason that they must look at this issue for so long and so in-depth is because people care about it and it's rather controversial shouldn't have the right to discriminate against things like sexuality and I think that protests about it are a lot like protests against integration during/after the civil rights movement. However, in America, everyone has the right to express their ideas, yourself included. So, just remember that and don't stoop to their level and dislike them for what they believe.
You would hope checks and balances would protect us from Big Brother, but then again those C&B allowed wire tapping, the Patriot Act, waterboarding, and is in many ways allowing the religious agenda to control policies.
I know 1984 seems like a very overbearing system, but one of the few differences is that at the point of 1984 they are very open about the control. Very much like V for Vendetta. We are at the secretive point where they may have the control and power they just try to justify it off until it appears innocent or in "our best interest".
As for brainwashing, there is a sense of necessary conformity in society. Schools teach us how to act and what we must do and many schools are getting more and more restrictive on the choices of classes. More and more required classes and less and less arts or other alternative subjects are being taught. And I'd argue as long as advertising and selective media has existed that we are in a society of brainwashing.
Don't believe me? Watch a DQ (or any other food commercial of your choice) and tell me you don't crave ice cream (or selective food being advertised).
The Heathen's Guide
PRIDE
ENVY
GLUTTONY
Well, I should hope the government makes laws about who you can have sex with to avoid things like sexual abuse and rape... O.o
The point isn't that the government shouldn't make any laws concerning any sexual act, its about who we can and can't basically have sex with. Rape, sexual abuse, things of that nature, in my opinion are crimes or violence and dominance, not a crime of sex. Of course rape should be illegal, but that doesnt mean the government should have to power to also say, people can't be homosexual if they want
I get what your saying. I think Kiota's point was simply the issue of consent, in which case, you are both in total agreement. Both partners have to be above the age of consent, of sound mind, and have to GIVE consent to the act. Beyond that, I can't see a reason to restrict any sexual behavior, either.
Except public sex, which again, is an issue of consent, because those forced to see it in public don't have the option of giving consent. But other than that, what business does the gubment have in sex?
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman