No committed gay couples here
Okay, the results are in.
Yesterday, Texans overwhelmingly voted to define marriage as between one man and one woman. That's how my religion defines it also, so I won't have to change my life thank goodness.
The amendment to our constitution also included "prohibiting this state or a political subdivision of this state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage."
No civil unions here. No recognition or recourse for couples that are in monogamous, long-term relationships as far as property rights, insurance benefits or even hospital visits - after all, they're not really a family.
It seems most Texans think it better that gays and lesbians sleep around, drift from partner to partner and bring their kids up in "serial" family enviroments, with different adults as heads of households every couple of years.
Oh my gosh!
At first I thought that most Texans were prejudiced against homosexual couples.
But I just realized they're not. Otherwise they wouldn't want homosexuals to be just like them (only without the expense of the divorce)!
Yesterday, Texans overwhelmingly voted to define marriage as between one man and one woman. That's how my religion defines it also, so I won't have to change my life thank goodness.
The amendment to our constitution also included "prohibiting this state or a political subdivision of this state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage."
No civil unions here. No recognition or recourse for couples that are in monogamous, long-term relationships as far as property rights, insurance benefits or even hospital visits - after all, they're not really a family.
It seems most Texans think it better that gays and lesbians sleep around, drift from partner to partner and bring their kids up in "serial" family enviroments, with different adults as heads of households every couple of years.
Oh my gosh!
At first I thought that most Texans were prejudiced against homosexual couples.
But I just realized they're not. Otherwise they wouldn't want homosexuals to be just like them (only without the expense of the divorce)!
posted by Kurt at 1:07 PM
2 Comments:
I just read about that in the Lake Jackson Facts, our local newspaper. I have a friend or two who are gay. So the thought of 'civil union' never bothered me--that's their business--but calling it marriage always has. My church considers marriage to be between a man and a woman, so does the Bible, and so has history. Marriage has always been between a man and a woman since the brginning of time. I think some traditions should be left alone. But a 'civil union' is a great phrase, in my mind, to call gay unity, should any state or country allow such practice.
That's just my opinion. And like I have said before...
Opinions are like assholes; everybody has one.
On another note, I just realized yu live here in Texas. I must be living under a rock or something. Howdy neighbor!
Post a Comment
<< Home