Gay Marriage

I admit I'm mostly uninformed. Yet I still feel like I have some things to say about the topic of gay marriage that I don't hear stated very often.

First of all, I don't think it's okay to practice homosexual activity, and even if genetic influences are involved there is still choice in the activities a person participates in. But this isn't about whether or not laws should stop people from immoral behavior. After all, I think it's immoral to have extramarital sex, but that is pervasive and unpunished in our society. So it's important to point out that if marriage keeps its current meaning (i.e. no gay marriage) that does not preclude anyone from behaving how they wish.

The gay marriage argument seems to lump a bunch of issues into one. Supposedly this is about rights that are affected by marriage status. I don't know what all the rights are for families (even though I am married and have children). Two come to my mind. Tax breaks (for kids) and adoption. Let's assume there are many others. By redefining marriage to include homosexual relationships, we uniformly remove all discriminating between the two in all cases (I purposely used the word "discrimination" to bother those who think it's a bad word). I think each case and right should be handled individually. Not only does the gay marriage movement try to change a large clump of legal implications all at once, reaching as far as public education, without specifically addressing what the effects will be, but it also tries to remove the possibility of ever distinguishing between the types of "marriage" in the future.

For example, I'm told that gay couples can currently adopt children, at least in some states, even without gay marriage. This is an issue for many people, and certainly some adoption agencies would not like to be involved in this. However, if gay marriage is legal, this issue becomes void. Agencies that don't want to be involved in giving adoptions to gay couples will face law suits. This has already happened in states where gay marriage is legal. So that's one important issue that's carried in the basket of gay marriage.

It's hard to justify the governments current support of families (I'm not one that likes to look at empirical data involving social behavior and make a case out of it). This is a form of discrimination they we as a society have decided to embrace, thank goodness. Gay unions should be classified as a separate entity, with their own set of rights and privileges established. By legally lumping in these new types of marriage into the marriage category we are diluting our traditional support of families. It seems that the gay marriage proponents carefully avoid talking about two important observations. One---gay marriage brings with it much more than the ability to live together and love. Two---the same arguments about rights and discrimination that are used in favor of gay marriage could also be used to add a variety of other arrangements into the category of marriage or remove the legal status of marriage all together. If that were directly proposed, it would be swiftly defeated. When logic leads to inconsistency or undesired conclusions, you have to question the premise.

My mother went to graduate school for a degree in teaching while she was raising four children. If I remember correctly, we had free "family" passes to the swimming pool for a while. Then the university decided not to discriminate against unmarried couples, so the "family" benefits were extended to a larger group of people, such as "partners." In the end, we no longer could swim for free. Let me restate that: The family privileges were extended to everyone. How generous of them.

In honesty, I realize that my argument for a separate category (like "unions") could be turned against me. Why not say that marriages between people of different races should be in a separate category as well? There was a point in history when this might have gained approval. I don't have a good answer for that. They just seem like fundamentally different issues, rooted as deeply as biology itself.

On top of everything I've said, I don't want the government to dictate that my children must be taught that being gay is perfectly acceptable. It's not hard to see that this is going there and beyond. I can teach my children on my own to love and accept people regardless of their choices.

Ronald Reagan Speeches on Youtube

These speeches by Ronald Reagan are worth listening to:
A Time to Choose
Tear Down This Wall

This compilation is pretty fun:
Ronald Reagan's Humor

Hillary Clinton visits primary school

I received an important story about Hillary Clinton by email yesterday. This is posted all over the web, but it's worth repeating once more here:


Hillary Clinton was spending the morning at a primary school
in Ithaca, New York, to talk to the children about her job as
a US Senator. After her talk, she offered question time. One
little boy put up his hand, and the Senator asked him his
name. "Kenneth." "And what is your question, Kenneth?" "I
have three questions:
First - Whatever happened to your medical health care plan?
Second -Why would you run for President after your husband shamed
the office?
And third - Whatever happened to all the stuff you and President Clinton took when you left the White House?"

Just then the bell rang for recess. Hillary Clinton informed the kids that they would continue after recess.

When they resumed, Hillary said, "Okay, where were we? Oh, that's
right, question time. Who has a question?" A different little boy raised
his hand; the esteemed Senator from New York pointed him out and
asked him his name. "Larry." "And what is your question?"

" I have five questions:
First - Whatever happened to your medical health care plan?
Second -Why would you run for President after your husband shamed the office?
And third - Whatever happened to all the stuff you and President Clinton took when you left the White House?
Fourth - Why did the recess bell go off 40 minutes early?
And Fifth - What happened to Kenneth?"

Obama's Use of the Internet

Matthew sent this article to me about Obama's use of the internet for his campaign.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/29/technology/leonard_politics.fortune/index.htm

Romney's Withdrawal Speech

If any of you have not seen this, I highly recommend you watch this when you get a chance. It is one the best speeches he has given in my opinion, and he wrote it himself (as opposed to having his speechwriters do it).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23051902#23051902

What is the difference?

I'd like to start out by asking a question.  What is the difference
between us and radical Muslim terrorists?  Heck, what is the
difference between any two religious beliefs?  This has bothered me
for some time now.  One person gets born into a Mormon family, another
into a Hindu family, another into a Muslim family, another into a
terrorist family, etc.  How can a person know which message has truth
and light and which does not?  From a doctrinal standpoint, it's
difficult to make an objective argument.  Christians certainly can't
claim that jihadists are wrong for wanting to kill those who don't
share their beliefs when Jehovah commanded the Israelites to do the
exact same thing in the Old Testament.  Furthermore, the scriptures
talk about justice being handed out not just in the life to come but
also in our mortal existence as well, particularly during the Second
Coming.  So how can we find light?

I have come to one conclusion.  For those who exemplify truth,
integrity must come before the message.  What I have found alarming
over the years is how so many passionate members of faith sacrifice
some of the principles they believe in, and frankly we should all
believe in, for the sake of their message.  Honesty and kindness
should be the foundation of who we are, particularly for those who
claim to follow spiritual truth.  The same thing applies to all of the
many activists in the world.  How many activists are willing to "put
it all on the line" so to speak for their cause?  How many read
nothing but propaganda and then try to convince others they have the
truth?  How many choose to smear and defame the opposition because
they are certain their cause justifies the means?  As a Mormon,
honesty, kindness, respect for the agency of others, and the constant
pursuit of all truth must come before my religious message.  I hope I
never forget this because once I do, the words that come out of my
mouth will no longer have the power of truth behind them.

A book I recommend is the autobiography of Malcom X.  His life story
is a great example of someone who started out poorly but through
constant searching for truth, eventually found what he was looking
for.

Presidential Candidate Vote

We conducted an experiment to try out the voting system that I've proposed here: http://cuff-family.blogspot.com/2007/08/new-voting-system.html. The main idea is to only compare candidates pairwise, so that third parties won't cause any splitting of votes. Each voter listed all of the candidates that they cared for in their order of preference.

This vote was conducted among a small group of people with similar opinions/values, so it's not necessarily representative of the population. It's not surprising, for example, that Romney beat everyone unanimously. Also, unfortunately, only five people participated in the vote. However, the voting did yield an unambiguous full ordering of preferences among the candidates, which is fortunate and not always the case. The list is below.

Let me also mention that Richardson fared poorly because three voters did not include him in their list. The list of candidates that I suggested at the beginning was incomplete, and I apologize for that.

Order of preference among presidential candidates:

Romney
Thompson
Hunter
Giuliani
McCain
Obama
Paul
Huckabee
Clinton
Edwards
Richardson

Romney as "standard bearer" for conservatives

I don't know if you guys saw this, but this bodes well for Romney in 2012.

http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080209/NATION/963183699/0/SPORTS

Ann Coulter at CPAC

This is a long speech (about 50 minutes) Ann Coulter gave last week. The best part is during the Q&A portion. Not as concise as her usual stuff, but fun to listen to when you have time.

http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/b9769a28-f1fa-4ee9-af17-c9955af1a2e5