Archive for same-sex marriage

Stuff Going On — 06/02/2017

Posted in For Free Trade, For God with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 2, 2017 by cavalier973

One down, two to go. The opinion piece discusses three actions taken by President Obama that just oozes authoritarianism: The Paris Accords/Agreement/Treaty, Illegal Surveillance of American Citizens, and the “Iran deal”. President Trump has now relegated the first item to File 13. However, as Allahpundit noted on Twitter, Trump is as likely to change his mind and throw his support to the Paris Agreement as he is to stay firm in righteous action. He’s already talking about “renegotiating” the deal. Not necessary, at all.

California lawmakers have taken a huge step toward creating a state “single payer” system. This means that, in California, anyone going to the doctor or hospital will have their visit paid for by the government. This is different from a “public option”, where the government provides alternatives to traditional private health insurance. The single payer system is proposed to cost $400 billion, which is more than the California government can afford, at present. Governor Jerry Brown is reportedly “cool” to the idea.

I hope they get it passed. It would be interesting to see how quickly the state goes bankrupt, the access to, and quality of, medical services deteriorates, and the population of California fluctuates. I imagine that a lot of people will initially immigrate to California to get their “free health care”, only to abandon the poor husk of a state after all the doctors have retired or left, the hospitals are boarded up, and people have to travel to neighboring states to get routine procedures done. because medical services in California are rationed.

♥ So, Lansing Michigan elevates people’s feelings over other people’s right to own and use property.

I get it; the Supreme Court has ruled that people don’t have property rights, anymore. Well, they’re wrong. Anyone who opens a business has the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. This includes hotels, gas stations, grocery stores, movie theaters, restaurants, and other businesses offering services “to the public”. If a restaurant’s owner does not want to serve Christians, he has every right to ban them from his privately owned business, while at the same time serving everyone else of whatever creed. Forcing this restaurant owner to use his property to serve Christians when he prefers not to is a form of theft, which God forbids.

Honestly, though, it’s not like the farmer who is being banned from the farmer’s market for his absolutely correct stance on “same-sex marriage” has an actual right to participate in the farmer’s market. If he wishes, he should purchase some land and start his own farmer’s market. It would probably be superior in every way to the public market.

♦ Fox News reported the other day that over 250,000 jobs were created in May. I don’t know where they got their numbers. The most recent news is that a mere 138,000 jobs were created in May, versus an estimate of 185,000. Unemployment has dropped to its lowest level in 16 years, to a rate of 4.3%.

President Trump may want to claim credit for this; some small part of the drop in unemployment may be attributed to him, but the economy today is a function of the policies that President Obama had been pursuing for eight years–primarily the policy of “easy money” by the Federal Reserve. We are in the “Boom” phase of the “Boom-Bust” cycle, where all the nonsense occurs that must be corrected in the next “Bust” phase.

Speaking of jobs, and the Paris Agreement that Trump thankfully withdrew from, I’ve been seeing tweets on Twitter that say something along the lines of: “You can’t say that Trump saved jobs by pulling the US from the Paris Agreement; the coal industry only employs 50,000 people, while the renewable energy firms employ several times that number of people.”

This is correct; coal, which once employed over 800,000 Americans, only employs around 50,000 people these days (70,000, if you include ancillary businesses). The renewable energy companies employ several times that number of people. Looking at the amount of energy each subindustry produces, however, shows that coal–by itself–produces around twice the amount of energy that every renewable energy company (solar, wind, etc.) produces.

Relying on Renewable Energy for our energy needs is suboptimal. Paying more to produce less is wasteful, and inefficient. And that’s assuming that the Renewable Energy industry is economically viable. Most renewable energy companies rely heavily on government subsidies to stay afloat. Traditional “fossil fuel” companies also receive subsidies that are exponentially greater than those doled out to the Renewable Energy Firms. These subsidies should be eliminated, but the “fossil fuel companies” would probably be profitable without the subsidies, just not as much. Renewable Energy companies would go bankrupt without government assistance.

A U.S. agency is being investigated for providing loans to solar companies that were on the verge of bankruptcy.

Transgenders and Same-Sex Marriage

Posted in For God with tags , , , on May 26, 2017 by cavalier973

An article about a “pagan lesbian” who is critical of transgenderism as an anti-science movement. Well, it started with “Same-Sex Marriage”. Once we decide that we want words to mean different things in order to gain some political advantage, then we destroy any bulwark against real life Newspeak.

Some News Items

Posted in For Free Trade with tags , , , , , , on April 17, 2017 by cavalier973

 

♠ Vice-President Mike Pence declares that “all options are on the table” with regard to North Korea and its nukular fetish.

♣ Steve Stephens gets mad at his girlfriend, decides to kill innocent people.

♥ A judge stops a state government from performing same-sex marriages, and then joins a pro-“traditional marriage” rally. Well, not exactly.

Puerto Rico is struggling financially

“Same-sex Marriage” and Miscegenation Laws

Posted in For God with tags , , , on January 8, 2015 by cavalier973

One of the arguments (which isn’t really an argument) that proponents of “same-sex marriage” put forth is an emotional appeal that follows along the lines of: “So, you don’t support marriage equality for homosexuals; I bet you would have opposed the repeal of the miscegenation laws, that prevented mixed-race couples from marrying”. The assertion is usually some variation of that statement.

It is an invalid comparison, however, because the situation is different. With the miscegenation laws, a white man could marry a white woman, but a black man could not marry a white woman. In the same way, a black man could marry a black woman, but a white man could not marry a black woman. The white man was granted a privelege by the government that the government then denied to the black man, and vice versa.

With regard to same-sex marriage, heterosexuals do not have a right to marry someone of the same sex that is then denied to homosexuals. However, homosexuals are not prohibited from marrying someone of the opposite sex. The situation we have at present is “marriage equality”.

What the proponents of same-sex marriage wish for is an expansion of the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples. If they succeed*, then the situation will still be “marriage equality”, since there would be no reason to deny heterosexual partners the “right” to have a government-licensed marriage (to add legal advantages to a business partnership, for example).

The problem is that “marriage” has a certain definition: it is a heterosexual union for the purposes of companionship and procreation. That’s clear from Scripture. But even for someone who rejects Truth, the definition of marriage still holds. Marriage is how society manages the bearing and rearing of children. It works pretty well, overall.

In addition, relinquishing to the government the authority to redefine words is unwise. The government always seeks to increase its power over those living within its borders, and the ability to control the language is a key component to its agenda. When people can no longer communicate effectively, then they are more easily divided and suppressed.

*which they apparently will, through the courts; the “debate” over same-sex marriage ended with the defenders of definitional marriage–as a heterosexual union–winning at the ballot box. Their democratic victory has since been overturned in various places by the intervention of Federal judges 

On Same-Sex Marriage

Posted in For God with tags , , , on July 4, 2014 by cavalier973

Article is here.

An article on same-sex couples

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , on May 23, 2014 by cavalier973

Interesting stuff.

The question as posed: “Are same-sex couples just like you?” (“You” meaning heterosexual couples).

My answer: “Only if they can have children through sexual intercourse.  Oh, wait; they can’t even have sexual intercourse (whether it’s a male or a female couple being considered).  The best they can manage is mutual masturbation sessions.”

The two branches of American libertarianism

Posted in For Free Trade, For God with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 18, 2013 by cavalier973

Read the article here.

The author is basically relabelling the “Yokeltarian/Cosmotarian” argument that is being perpetually debated over at reason.com (Hit and Run).  The argument goes something like this: there is a group of people (“Yokeltarians”, or, according to this author, “Calhounians”, after the former US Vice-President John C. Calhoun) who are culturally Southern and rural; they distrust the Federal Government because of the Civil War, and so are motivated to limit central government.  The worldview of such folk is generally Christian and traditional; they tend to study the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, oppose “social rights” like legal abortion and “same-sex marriage”, and are generally recognized by those living outside their inbred society as neo-luddite morons.

Then, there is another group of people (“Cosmotarians”, or, per the author, “Heinleinians”, after Robert Heinlein, an engineer and science fiction writer), who tend to be culturally urban and sophisticated, not to mention astonishingly intelligent and good-looking, who recognize that people need the “freedom” to murder children in the womb and invent new meanings for words like “marriage”.  These people tend to study Science!, see the future, and are working on using science and technology to create utopia on earth, where there will be no disease or scarcity, and where “mother earth” will be cared for as she ought to be, and where death itself will someday be conquered.

The author (he calles himself “Hamilton”), makes some interesting assertions.  For example, he describes President Obama as “sort of, kind of” libertarian, because he doesn’t seem to want to regulate the activities of the tech-savvy cosmotarians.  He wonders how Christians can square what’s in the Bible with “what’s going on in Silicon Valley”.  He asserts that technology, via the atomic bomb, “saved millions of American lives” (and thus shows a need for a strong central government that can arrange the creation and construction of atomic bombs).  He is critical of Romney for scorning Newt Gingrich’s plan to colonize the moon.  He points out that there is a reason why “gay marriage and free trade are always advancing”.

Well, President Obama isn’t regulating cosmotarian technology–yet.  Just give him time.

What’s going on in Silicon Valley that I would need to “square” with the Bible?  He mentions a proposal to fuse human consciousness with computers (my paraphrase).  Well, it’s a proposal, not a reality, and I seriously doubt it could ever become a reality because, despite the adamant assertions of the Delusional Darwinoids, we humans are not just a mass of chemicals that exist due to a cosmic accident.  Life has never been shown to come from non-living materials through natural processes.  A better hypothesis is that life was created, by a Creator.  I’m going to go out on a limb and say that human consciousness will never be stored in a computer.

As for the atom bomb, I doubt that it really saved “millions of American lives”.  Japan had already been trying to surrender for about a year; Douglas MacArthur, the commander in the Pacific, opposed the use of atomic bombs to “get Japan to surrender”.  In reality, the atomic bombs were to show Russia that 1.) we had them, 2.) we weren’t afraid to use them, and 3.) Russia better be satisfied with the portion of Europe it had already grabbed.  I guess, in a sense, one could argue that the atomic bomb *did* save millions of American lives, by preventing a war with the Soviet Union, but such an argument would be, in the end, merely speculation.

Newt Gingrich also said that the people on the moon would vote to make the moon the 51st state.  I recall a “Simpsons” cartoon where the children in Lisa’s class were shown a 1950-era film in which the claim was made that the moon “belongs to America.”  Life imitates “The Simpsons”!  In reality, Romney was quite right to criticize Newt’s idea: it was a stupid idea.

And the bit about “gay marriage advancing”?  Well, while three states have had “same-sex marriage” approved by popular vote, the rest of the states that have legalized “same-sex marriage” have done so through legislatures or the courts.  29 states still have “bans” on the practice instilled in their state constituitons (though I doubt that a same-sex couple in Tennessee that decides to go ahead and “get married” without a state license will be going to jail).

About Free Trade, we don’t have it, except perhaps among the various states.  All “free trade agreements” are actually government-managed trade treaties, so it’s a bit naive to think that Free Trade is “advancing”, even though that would be awesome.  Also, trade is the one activity that almost all economists of varying political philosophies agree is unequivocably beneficial to all parties involved.  It’s not a “left-right” issue, in other words.

He posits four “problems” with Calhounism.  1. The threat of foreign invaders necessitates a strong central government.  2.  You can’t have the internet without a strong central government.  3.  Calhounians are luddites.  4.  Calhounians are ignorant luddites.

The challenge for Heinleinians is: 1. That they’re so darned smart.  I’m talking wicked smart.  These guys are going to figure out how to become immortal, for crying out loud.  Also, they’re going to mine asteroids in space.  2.  They’re so freaking rich, that, even when they inevitably discover the technological secret to immortality, they will be the only ones able to enjoy it, which will be a problem.  3.  They sort of, kind of, like Progressivism, and would call themselves Progressives.  4. They just might turn into real-life versions of James Bond villains, which would make some people uncomfortable.
My reaction to all this?  Meh.  “Hamilton” is obviously a Cosmotarian, but he realizes that there aren’t that many Cosmotarians, and that for his movement to succeed, it needs to join with the icky neo-Confederate Sky-Daddy Worshippers.  His preferred method would be to persuade the nCSDW crowd to drop the opposition to antepartum infanticide and preposterous notions like “apple pies” made with peaches “same-sex marriage”.  Sorry, but if you want people to join you, it is you who must drop the evulz, Ham.