5 New and Improved Arguments Against Gay Marriage
This week has seen a lot of chatter about gay marriage due to the US Supreme Court hearing arguments about the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8 and the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. And one thing that has really hit home with me is this: bigots, your arguments suck.
I mean, come on – is this really the best you can do?!
Marriage has always been defined as one man and one woman. This is patently false. Also, under this logic, we should ban interracial marriage.
If you allow gays to marry, you have to allow pedophiles to marry children or people to marry animals. Again, this is a shit argument. Gay people who get married are consenting adults. Children and animals cannot legally consent.
The Bible says homosexuality is wrong. Yeah, and the Bible also bans tattoos, shaving your head, and wearing cotton t-shirts with your denim blue jeans.
The states should have the right to determine what marriage is and isn’t. Well, in that case Prop 8 should be struck down since the state of California ruled against it and DOMA should be thrown out because it is currently in violation of state decisions to allow gay marriage.
Come on, all you assholes! Bring your A-Game! Since you guys suck so much at oppressing people, I’m going to do you a solid and pitch some new arguments that you can use. That way we can at least keep the crap you spew fresh.
- Gay marriage will lose us the War on Terror. It’s a well-known fact that Islam is against gay marriage. (Well, not really compared to other conservative religions, but it’s not like anybody in this country knows jack shit about Islam anyway.) By allowing gay marriage, we are basically taunting the terrorists, which means that they’ll redouble their attacks on us. Therefore, we must wait until after we have won the War on Terror before discussing the constitutionality of gay marriage.
- Gay marriage makes learning hard. We’re way behind as a country when it comes to education. Right now, we can easily define marriage as something between a man and a woman, then move on to more important subjects like math and reading. But if you have to add gay men and women to that definition, we have to spend a whole other sentence on the definition. Every additional sentence is valuable time being taken away from other important subjects.
- It will ruin our healthcare system. Lets’ face it: healthcare in this country is royally screwed. Our population is living longer, which is leading to a huge struggle to pay for all the social security and medicare benefits. This is only going to be made worse by gay couples who live happily together. Happiness causes people on average to live longer, which means we’ll have even more old people that we have to pay for if we stop discriminating against gays. We’ve already screwed the pooch when it comes to other minorities – we can’t give up our right to make the lives of gay people miserable, thus saving us millions of dollars down the road.
- It will devastate the political process. Our country is made great by the polarizing nature of our political parties. George Washington said it best in his farewell address:The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.
Oops…sorry. That’s what he actually said. I meant to misquote him thusly:
Political parties are awesome and will in no way render our government a body of completely corrupt ineffective dinosaurs.
And the heart of our amazing two-party system? A clear divide between Republicans and Democrats. The Republicans had the foresight to make discrimination of gays a core part of their party values back in the 1990s. Sure, the Democrats were complicit in that up until pretty recently, but now the battle lines are drawn. The red guys hate gay marriage, the blue guys pretend to like it as long as it is politically convenient for them to do so. If we take that divide away, we make the two parties too similar to each other. If we can’t conveniently color code our beliefs, we’ll need to rely on a representative democracy where people actually view the candidates as individuals rather than representations of their political brand. Thinking is bad for the political process, and we must simplify matters for the average voter at all cost.
- Gay marriage ruins it for us collectors. I approached my marriage the same way I approach a mint-edition copy of The Incredible Hulk #1: wearing latex gloves and encasing my spouse in plastic at the earliest opportunity. I did this because I want my marriage to be worth something in 50 years. It’s bad enough that I already damaged the mint condition by letting my penis out of its wrapper and having one of those children thingies, but who manages to actually keep a mint condition marriage, anyway? The point is this: we collectors take our investment seriously. Back when I got married, it was an investment. With the divorce rate through the roof, I had every reason to believe that I would be able to sell my marriage down the road for much more than it had originally cost me. But if we allow millions of more people to marry, it hurts the rarity and thus the overall value of the brand.In the past five years I’ve worked really hard at making my marriage more rare. I’ve done this by sabotaging other people’s weddings, oppressing homosexuals, and occasionally committing crimes that my lawyer has advised that I don’t speak of here. In short, I approached my marriage like it was Highlander.
And now these gays are turning marriage into Highlander 2.
Okay, so I might have gotten a bit carried away here, but at least these are some fresh new arguments for you assholes out there who want to deny others basic human rights. So let’s retire the worn out old Bible-thumping arguments and go to something fresh and new…like really reaching to come up with a Highlander analogy.