Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Blog 9...maybe. Its a FREE WRITE!!!
Im guessing a "freewrite" means I can write about whatever I want, however I want and its ok. That must be why its "free". So I could write withnospacesor i coud write spellin everthin rong or i could not give a crap about puncuation and correct grammar. I deduce I must not have to make this sound like it was written with the slightest bit of intellegence or writing ability. I guess that could be pretty cool too. I wont have to worry about the use of first or second person pronouns or contractions. It would be pretty dang cool if we could always write like this and not have to give a flip about what Mr. Hughes is going to read into our papers or not read into them. Sometimes, when writing, i get so worried that something doesnt sound just right I stress myself out about it. But as I have noticed, in this class, it really doesnt matter how your paper sounds, if Mr. Hughes doesnt like it, you get an F or maybe a D if hes in a good mood. This blog is in no way meant to degrade or say bad things about Mr. Hughes. I really wish I could just live a nomadic style life: no highschool, no college, no work, no nothing (yes, Im aware thats a double negative but read the rest of the paper, I DONT CARE!!!) I wish there were no quzizzes. How BOSS would that be? Yes, I did just bring back the slang "boss" and I do believe it is pretty boss so, spread it around. It is currently 10:30, on I think its Monday, maybe Tuesday, and Im not sure when this FREE WRITE is due, so Im doing it now. And Im not going to change it come tomorrow, or the next day. Its fine just how it is. And do you know why? Because, It's a free write and I get to express myself in whatever way I feel neseccary. And I am in a bad mood today, so I guess that bad moodiness will be taken out on this poor laptop and this stupid blog and this incredibly pointless assignment (I mean incredibly pointless unless it will bring up my grade in any way shape or form.) Well, I guess this just about covers my 200, word minimum. Actually I just broke 400 words without a sweat. Damn it feels good to write about everything, yet nothing at all.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Same Sex Marriage(VIII)
How much power is too much power? The government controls one's food, education, television programs, etc. The government is also attempting to control one's love life. Same sex marriage is a hot topic in political forums all over the nation. Should the government be able to regulate to whom one makes their vows? By laws set by the US and state governments, they have this power. Society should not have the power to tell someone who they can and can not marry because marriage is between two people who love each other.
Control by the government comes from various laws set over the citizens. Society now has the power to tell someone how to live their love life. Just because a relationship does not follow precedent does not mean the relationship and the love is not legitimate. In 2004, six months after homosexual marriages began in Massachusetts, 11 states approved constitutional amendments verifying matrimony as a heterosexual institution. The executive director for the NGLTF (National Gay and Lesbian Task Force) claimed that the voting on these amendments put "basic rights up to popular vote." (Peterson,2004) The United States Federal Government traditionally recognized any marriage that was recognized by the state. In 1996 the Defense of Marriage Act gave "marriage" a definition by saying it is the union of one man and one woman for the purpose of the federal government; yet, this act does not have the power to define marriage for separate states. Therefore, if a homosexual couple is married in Massachusetts the marriage is recognized by the state, but not the federal government. (Same Sex Marriage in the United States, Wikipedia) Laws which ban same sex marriage do in fact tell certain people how to live their love lives; which is obviously a violation of the constitutional clause saying that each citizen is entitled to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
Most of the devout feelings against same sex marriage comes from religious beliefs. People brought up in a Christian family are more likely to be against gay/lesbian marriage because of the beliefs they were brought up in. Many people believe that society has the right to tell someone who they can and can not marry because it is "morally wrong" to marry someone of the same sex. Telling a group of people that they cant marry someone of the same gender is like telling someone that they are not allowed to lie or drink alcohol. One person may see no harm in having a couple drinks but another could think it is one of the worst sins possible. What gives that person who thinks drinking is a sin the authority to not allow the other to drink? It is the same with same sex marriage. It is a persons constitutional right to be allowed freedom and happiness, some people may be denied those rights because of their sexual orientation.
It all just comes back to what is "morally right" and what is "morally wrong". Just because someone is different that what society is use to, they should not be denied their happiness. Due to certain laws set into place by our government, society now has the power to tell someone whom they can and can not marry. Society has defined marriage in a way that excludes some of the population. Society has taken away a freedom from those who wish to marry someone of the same gender. Society already controls what we watch, what we listen to, and what we wear. Should they be able to control this too?
Control by the government comes from various laws set over the citizens. Society now has the power to tell someone how to live their love life. Just because a relationship does not follow precedent does not mean the relationship and the love is not legitimate. In 2004, six months after homosexual marriages began in Massachusetts, 11 states approved constitutional amendments verifying matrimony as a heterosexual institution. The executive director for the NGLTF (National Gay and Lesbian Task Force) claimed that the voting on these amendments put "basic rights up to popular vote." (Peterson,2004) The United States Federal Government traditionally recognized any marriage that was recognized by the state. In 1996 the Defense of Marriage Act gave "marriage" a definition by saying it is the union of one man and one woman for the purpose of the federal government; yet, this act does not have the power to define marriage for separate states. Therefore, if a homosexual couple is married in Massachusetts the marriage is recognized by the state, but not the federal government. (Same Sex Marriage in the United States, Wikipedia) Laws which ban same sex marriage do in fact tell certain people how to live their love lives; which is obviously a violation of the constitutional clause saying that each citizen is entitled to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
Most of the devout feelings against same sex marriage comes from religious beliefs. People brought up in a Christian family are more likely to be against gay/lesbian marriage because of the beliefs they were brought up in. Many people believe that society has the right to tell someone who they can and can not marry because it is "morally wrong" to marry someone of the same sex. Telling a group of people that they cant marry someone of the same gender is like telling someone that they are not allowed to lie or drink alcohol. One person may see no harm in having a couple drinks but another could think it is one of the worst sins possible. What gives that person who thinks drinking is a sin the authority to not allow the other to drink? It is the same with same sex marriage. It is a persons constitutional right to be allowed freedom and happiness, some people may be denied those rights because of their sexual orientation.
It all just comes back to what is "morally right" and what is "morally wrong". Just because someone is different that what society is use to, they should not be denied their happiness. Due to certain laws set into place by our government, society now has the power to tell someone whom they can and can not marry. Society has defined marriage in a way that excludes some of the population. Society has taken away a freedom from those who wish to marry someone of the same gender. Society already controls what we watch, what we listen to, and what we wear. Should they be able to control this too?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
