Monday, July 27, 2009

The Constitution on Homosexuals

This has always been a funny issue for me, namely because of my religious upbringing and schooling. It has always been preached that homosexuals are evil humans that are perverting them selves for their own pleasure. Whether that is true or not is up to debate in that arena – in the government arena we have different questions. These questions deal with rights and legal consequences.

I will address two major questions as a fan of small government and constitutional thinking would (not as a religiously focused individual person I am) because that is the only opinion that matters when dealing with laws.

First, can homosexuals get married?

In the present system, states define who can and cannot get married. Under the Constitution, they have that power: under amendment ten. Any powers not given to the federal government are given to the states, powers not used by the states are given to the people – that is simple constitutional thinking. Therefore, if Georgia wants it to be illegal for homosexuals to get married in their state, they have that right. If California wants it to be legal for homosexuals to get married in their state, more power to you.

Ideally, I would like to see states get out of the marriage business all together. Marriage is a religiously defined institution. God came up with the idea according to Judeo-Christian belief systems, and other belief systems. Why does anyone want the government to become a de facto leader and council for their religious organizations. In an ideal system, the individual churches, synagogues, and temples would choose according to their individual religious texts whether or not homosexuals can get married. All laws favoring (or in the present culture, not favoring) marriage should be taken off the books. Let the religious institution not be tampered by government.

Secondly, can homosexuals volunteer in the military?

I would like to begin with a quote from the 1964 Republican Presidential Nominee and Republican Senator from Arizona from 1953 until 1987, Barry M. Goldwater:

"After more than 50 years in the military and politics, I am still amazed to see how upset people can get over nothing. Lifting the ban on gays in the military isn't exactly nothing, but it's pretty damned close

Everyone knows that gays have served honorably in the military since at least the time of Julius Caesar. They'll still be serving long after we're all dead and buried. That should not surprise anyone.

But most Americans should be shocked to know that while the country's economy is going down the tubes, the military has wasted half a billion dollars over the past decade chasing down gays and running them out of the armed services.

It's no great secret that military studies have proved again and again that there's no valid reason for keeping the ban on gays. Some thought gays were crasy, but then found that wasn't true. then they decided that gays were a security risk, but again the Department of Defense decided that wasn't so-in fact, one study by the Navy in 1956 that was never made public found gays to be good security risks. Even Larry Korb, President Reagan's man in charge of implementing the Pentagon ban on gays, now admits that it was a dumb idea. No wonder my friend Dick Cheney, secretary of defense under President Bush, called it 'a bit of an old chestnut'"

Barry Goldwater is correct – homosexuals have served there country honorably and will continue to serve there country honorably. The root question lies, why does it really matter?

Does anyone honestly think that two American soldiers are going to get into a gun fight because another solider is gay?

Do they think a gay solider is going to rape another solider because they think they are attractive?

If these are really the case, than why do they allow women into the military – wait, because adultery is a punishable crime in the military. So, if a gay man cheated on his gay husband, he would be kicked out on the same charges.

It appears to me that this is type of thinking is designed for only one thing – to divide the American people from fighting the real social battles and the true problems facing this country: the rapid detraction of the liberties of the people, the enslavement of the youth of the country in military drafts, and a tax code that is stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars away from the working peoples of this country, and a Federal Reserve Board that is lining their pockets with our tax money.

As long as the people are divided, thought to think everyone is groups instead of as one American People, we will continue down the slipping slope down the road to serfdom until we can not remember, nor recognize the country we once lived in.

1 comment:

Daniel Butler said...

Only problem is this clause "Full faith and credit ought to be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings, of every other state" thats going to apply to some gay couple moving from a Blue State to a Red State, and they'll get mad, and it will have to be a national issue