Tuesday, October 07, 2008

My sample ballot...

...came in the mail yesterday. It was, as so many things are these days, depressing.

The city and state propositions were, as is normal, pleas for more money to hand over to the government. A quick skim put the total at some $23 billion in “general obligation” (we pay) bonds, plus tax hikes for “programs” and “initiatives” that have repeatedly failed to do what was promised.

And then there’s the “gay marriage” initiative. Will the people of California decide to refuse gay couples the right to marry? I’m sure those who think I’m some kind of dust-covered conservative would expect me to be all for it. I’m not. Mainly because it’s none of my damn business who someone else marries.

The current situation here is that gay couples can marry if they wish to. That doesn’t mean you have to marry a gay person. It simply means you may do so. That’s logical.

Like many other cases of social engineering, I see this as a “tip-of-the-iceberg” thing. If we tell gay couples they cannot legalize their unions, the next step could be that I will be refused the right to take out a marriage license because the intended bride is not of my race, or religion, or national origin. Or political affiliation.

Who is hurt by gay marriage? Those who want to be hurt. Those who go out of their way to impose their views on others.

If you tell me your religion “forbids” such unions, I can only reply that my religion – a self-compiled mish-mash, but mine nonetheless – doesn’t say a damn thing about it.

The mere fact that this, like abortion, has become a political issue, sickens me. And it makes no sense; why would “conservatives” (I am supposedly one) yearn to have laws mandating how others live? The whole premise of conservatism is – or used to be – that government should butt out of our lives as much as possible.

The position of so-called “liberals” strikes me as equally flawed. They appear to demand that there should be no hindrances on human behavior at all – as long as they approve of it – and, more, that those who engage in certain practices and hold certain beliefs – again, the ones on their own list – should have government funding and preferential treatment so they don’t feel “marginalized.”

Both groups are totally out to lunch, if you ask me.

So far, a big bunch of “no” votes. Several are “NO!!!!!!!” votes.

Picking my Congressman and state reps was easy. My Congressman voted against the Big Giveaway last week – twice – so supporting him again is a slam dunk. The seekers of state office, though unfamiliar, were easy: I looked at their self-provided current job descriptions. Easy enough to see who inflated their resumes....

That leaves only the first page of the ballot: the choice for President.

I’ll write about that later. Right now, I've just listened to the news and am too angry to get into it.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Considering all that's going on in the world these days, I agree that is WAAAAAY down my list of things to worry about. My voting plans are simple...I'm voting AGAINST every incumbent on the ballot.

S

John0 said...

Smoke and mirrors.

joan said...

I've never understood why people care so much about what other folks want to do.

Kim said...

Your comments about liberalism and conservatism are spot on Scrib. It is intersting how they have taken an identity far from original intention, and this identity seems to be taking on a life of its own.

betty said...

It's very depressing. :(

Mike said...

Gays marrying is not a marriage. It can be called a relationship but it is not a marriage.
Talk about social engineering? This is the ultimate.
Once this is established as legit you will see part 2 enacted.
Mandatory indoctrination in elementary school, you know sensitivity to diverse groups.

Not enough to just say respect others. Uh uh, this will be full blown acceptance indoctrination.

You seem a little older but take it from me there will be mortified parents statewide that will have their 6 year old first graders coming home with first year reading books about how John and John deserve to live life the way they choose.
Glad mine are older now.
Whew!

MrScribbler said...

Mike -- I don't condone the mandatory "acceptance" of everything that is being pushed by so-called educators and the liberal nannies in government.

My belief is that all must learn to be tolerant, all must learn not to force their views down others' throats.

I know very well that this is the thin end of the wedge. But what is right -- letting, so far as basic laws of decency and fairness allow, each person to be free to live with their personal choices -- must be defended, even as we must fight the notion that any group has more right to push their agenda than others.

My "tolerance" has strict limits. But even I can realize that other people's notions of marriage do not have to agree with mine.