Ah, the slippery slope

[khaosworks]

Sprechen Sie Englisch, Herr Gropenführer? By Mr. Terence Chua, Pissed Off And Loving It.

(thanks to mactavish for bringing it to my attention)

In an AP article, "San Francisco Honors Same-Sex Newlyweds", the Supreme Commandant of Stalag Kalifornia, Der Gropenführer Arnold Schwarzenegger is quoted as saying:

"In San Francisco, it is license for marriage of same sex. Maybe the next thing is another city that hands out licenses for assault weapons and someone else hands out licenses for selling drugs, I mean you can't do that," Schwarzenegger said Sunday on NBC.

I normally don't make fun of the way other people speak English, but I will in this case because I am a very, very small and petty man when it comes to numb-nuts like Schwarzenegger.

"In San Francisco, it is license for marriage of same sex." Well, fuck me.

As an encore, Arnold, why don't you for Great Justice, take off every Zig? You've been in the US how many years? There are New York cabbies just fresh off the last refugee plane from Baghdad just a step up from saying, "my hovercraft is full of eels," that speak better than you do. Repeat after me - a, an, the. A, an, the. Articles are your friends.

And of course, gay marriage is the same as a semi-automatic weapon spraying HORRIBLE FIERY DEATH and a drug fiend doped up on some primo horse. Fuckin' A, man - didn't you notice all those arms and drugs dealers standing on the steps of City Hall handing out ammo and vials of crack after the first couples got married the other day? All over the country, cities are just chomping at the bit to issue those drug dealing licenses. Mayors are just screaming to each other, "San Francisco did it, boys! The door's wide open!"

It. Simply. Boggles. The. Mind.

Can we recall this guy too?

Comments

Re: What Marriage Is

[elf]

>>It is an act of faith on the part of the state that your civil marriage is a spiritual one, and it is an abuse of that faith to enter into civil marriage without the spiritual backing.>>

Interesting theory. Which faith would that be?

There is no required spiritual component to marriage, not even an implied one. If there were, some types of atheists wouldn't be allowed to marry.

It would be an abuse of a religion to convince a pastor or priest to officiate at a wedding where the participants don't believe in that church's definition of marriage--but a that's got nothing to do with the legal contract involved.
Also, "caring & inheritance" has been a valid reason for marriage for thousands of years. In fact, "caring" is pretty optional; marriages have been done for the sole purpose of securing an inheritance (with full agreement by both parties; I'm not talking about scams) for a very long time.

>>I don't know what it is, but I know what it isn't.<<

Ah, something like porn then? "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it." This will not stand up in court; we're soon going to need either an actual definition of the requirements to enter a "marriage," or an open-door, anything-two-people-want-to-say-is-marriage policy.

The problem with defining it is that any definition will nullify plenty of straight, ordinary marriages.

>>True Spiritual Marriage is not something that any mortal man or woman has any say over<<

Then it would be pointless to have laws about it. Are you advocating an end to all laws pertaining to marriage, and moving it into the same legal void as "baptism?"--a ritual done by a religious institution in accordance with their beliefs, which has no legal status.