Saturday, February 9, 2008


I’m proud to say the Oregon is one of the eleven states that have some sort of partnership opportunity for same sex couples. Over the dead bodies so to speak of some of my fellow citizens. I still can’t quite understand why some of my fellow Oregonians are so obsessed with what their neighbors are doing in their bedrooms. God/dess get a life for cryin’ out loud.


And really could believe a letter in the Oregonian earlier in the week on the topic of sex is for procreation, period. Same sex partnerships are wrong because they can’t have kids with each other. Arrrrrrrrgh. At first I was going to blast off a nasty letter myself. I don’t know if it’s still true, but sex within marriage was a venial sin in the Catholic Church for generations. What the F……! A couple married in the church, with all the sacraments, etc. and sex, if you’re not planning on having kids, is still a sin? And the hierarchy wonders why they can’t get people in the church unless they can force them to attend. And on a planet straining at the seams due to overpopulation, it’s like ?????????????


As far as the letter goes though. There’s this saying. Don’t get in a fight with a pig, you get dirty and the pig enjoys it too much. On the other hand, if the pig is too annoying you can at least get some ham, sausage, and bacon out of it.


Odd thing, I’ve been working on Joy Chant’s collection of Celtic tales, The High Kings. Many of the Celts had up to ten different ways to be married. And only three were the permanent, exchange of bride gifts, or dowry kind of marriage. My feeling is that if you don’t want a same sex union, don’t have one, and leave everybody else alone. And I'm seeing more and more letters from people who are in mainline marriages asking "how does same sex marriage endanger my marriage?" Good for you guys.


A local columnist for the Eugene Register Guard had a great idea. A copy of the column can be found here. I think it’s a great idea. Get the state out of the marriage business. If a particular denomination doesn’t want to solemnize a same sex union that’s their business.


I may not think it’s right but if I’m not a member I don’t have a say. But it’s not fair to dictate to people who aren’t members of their group, either. (I really like his idea of limiting people to one marriage and if your divorced you get a domestic partnership. But, he kind of undercuts the get the state out of the marriage business idea with it)


And I guess I’m a little kinky or something. But, if more than two people want to stand up in front of God/dess and everybody and commit to one another, I don’t really have a problem with that. As long as they’re all adults, it’s not really my business.


Anyway, for now, same sex couples in Oregon can break out the Champaign and get it on. We’ll see how many times we have to vote to keep it that way. Maybe there is a good side to all the Californians moving up here. Because California and Washington have some kind of same sex partnership set up too.


dsonney01 said...

Kudos to you- it is about the people in the relationship not the state- I'm sure we will be hearing more garbage before November, huh?!

rdautumnsage said...

I've said it once and I'll say it again, you can't choose who your heart falls in love with....So who are we to condemn someone for following their heart and wanting to be partners with that person, no matter the sex. I'm with you as long as they're all adults involved, who are we to say....(Hugs) Indigo

mlraminiak said...

I heard a very interesting interview Sunday morning on OPB with a woman lawyer in Utah who made a very good case for polygamy (her husband has several other "wives".)  She said it was the ultimate feminist arrangement.  Your husband is in your life and in your bed at your invitation only.  And you are not the only one responsible for "making him happy."  And your kids never see the inside of a daycare center.  Really gave me some food for thought...

Lisa  :-]