I can understand the manipulation of speed limits from 45 mph to 35 mph. If the federal government wanted to change all the stoplights from the red, yellow and green to purple, pink and gold, it could do so. It can do so, because these are laws and customs that were initiated by the state, by the government for the safety of its peoples.

Just when did the concept of marriage begin? Hmmm. Let’s see, who was the president at the time? In what jurisdiction was it first instituted? Oh wait, it was around before the United States. That’s odd it was even around before people travelled to the land across the Atlantic. For that matter, people were bonding in unions and having children before Jesus walked the earth. They were doing that from before history was ever recorded.

But with a vote of 33 – 29, the state of New York proclaimed itself, to be the grand master, the director of all. “You say you’re not satisfied with the current situation. Hey, no problem, will vote it into being illegal”. And so, with that pronouncement, it is now legal to be married and of the same sex.

But WAIT… it doesn’t end there. Carry that out to its logical conclusion. If it is legal to have same-sex marriages, then those institutions (churches) who do not agree will be eventually prodded and banned for claiming something other than what these statesmen, these mental dwarfs, have just awarded.

What pomposity, what arrogance fills these elected officials. Do they think that they have the right to re-define what has stood for eons? Whether you believe in God, or nature, or some higher intelligence that remains nameless, you must see the audacity of these people. “Hey, I am an elected official. If my constituents want this, then I must serve their needs.” Is this what they hide behind? What about truth? What about the need to protect principle?

Let’s try a different tact. Not all of my constituents can afford a loaf of bread. But we have plenty of rocks on the ground. With a vote of 33 – 29, the state of New York has made it illegal to call rocks, rocks. From now on, rocks are bread. My constituents will now have full stomachs. They can eat … this bread. This obviously is absurd. But so too, is the redefinition of a natural occurrence that has stood the test of time.

Regardless of what the makeup of your backers, your voters are you have the responsibility to pursue principles of right, of reason. If you value your office so highly that you will compromise your reason, your intelligence so as to not offend your constituents, then you are worse than a prostitute. You are not worthy of the office to which you were elected.

Human nature has and will continue to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. The purpose of this union is to bear offspring. Marriage is NOT something that has as its GOAL, the satisfaction of one’s longing for another person. The goal of marriage has been, and will continue to be, the union of two persons so in love with each other, that their love will NATURALLY produce offspring.

The supporters of same-sex marriage will immediately jump all over this and say that a husband and wife, who cannot have children naturally, will adopt children. They will claim, “If they can adopt, then so also, should adoption be allowed to people of the same-sex”. That is where the wheel falls off the wagon. Loving couples can adopt to compensate for physical inabilities. Their love for each other moves them to fill a void that existed unbeknownst to them when they married.
Same-sex partners, on the other hand, want to adopt so as to assume the trappings of normalcy, where there is none. There was never a possibility of having a child with them as parents. Their loving wishes no matter how noble, cannot, and will not produce offspring by this union. Affection for another person of the same sex can be both beautiful and wholesome. To grace it with the term “marriage”, however, is both offensive and ludicrous. The state could and should define it as a same-sex state bonding. To that then, the state can attach whatever financial and tax breaks deemed appropriate. But to call it a marriage, the 33-29 vote accomplished nothing but the inflation of political egos that were already too inflated.