The Case Against Prop 8

Today is the first day of the Trial against Prop 8 (more).

I can't help myself... rant time. A number of small unrelated rantlettes follows:

---

One of the statements made today was that same-sex marriage "De-institutionalizes" the institution of marriage, [thus, I presume, harming the marriages of heterosexuals]. What absolute utter bonking absurdity.

---

In blog comments, I saw a slippery-sloper argue "If gays are allowed to marry, what next? We'll have to let siblings marry each other!"

For the sake of argument... let's ignore the 'inbreeding' angle for a moment. Siblings are already 'family', automatically imbued with state and federal recognition of their of their relationship. As "Next of Kin" they have legal rights that have, in many cases, TRUMPED the rights of a sibling's domestic partner. For siblings to marry each other would be, honestly, somewhat redundant. All they need do is NOT marry someone else.

---

I swear, if I hear one more person complain about the "liberals attempting to re-define the institution of marriage", I'll scream.

Think back for a moment... who were the two biggest advocates for Prop 8, trying to entrench their "one man, one woman" definition of marriage? The Catholic Church, and ancient order of unmarried men who have a shameful history of harboring pedophiles... and The Mormons who got their start believing that women were so utterly inferior to men that guys should be entitled to multiple wives.

If you ask me, both groups have 'issues' that render them unqualified to be 'defining' marriage for anyone.

They're welcome to believe whatever they want. It's a free country.
... or it was until they joined forces to impose their beliefs on the rest of us.