The issue of marriage equality is at the forefront of our national conscious this week, with movement on multiple legislative and legal fronts.
On Monday, February 13th, Washington State will become the 7th in the Union to legalize same-sex marriage, following that hippie-haven Iowa by just under three years. (Note: Washington, D.C. also allows gays and lesbians to legally marry but is sooooooo not a state.)
In California on February 7th, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that Prop 8 is unconstitutional. The state proposition, which defined marriage as strictly between one man and one woman, had been approved by the most progressive homophobes in the nation in November, 2008.
Delegates in numerous other states either already have introduced or are on the verge of introducing legislation or referendums both for and against marriage equality for gays and lesbians.
For example, Governor Martin O’Malley introduced and testified on behalf of the Maryland Marriage Equality Law before the House of Delegates on Friday, February 10th. He brought two nice Baptist boys with him to bear witness that they’re down with Civil Rights even if they’re not on the down-low with hot guy-on-guy action.
At shitmove.com, we’re not immune to trends. We’re interested in staying on the cutting edge of social and political issues (did you see our infamous ferret post?). So as not to be outdone by a bunch of queer-squeezers and Baptists boys, our Introduciary Committee has put the issue before our crack panel of 101 judges for swift and shit-free evaluation. As we are the common source for last words, consider this flaming hot national debate resolved once and for. Well, except for the last little legal part.
Final Verdict Rendered on Same-Sex Marriage
1000% of our judges agree that it is uncontestably and unbelievably shitty to prohibit two consenting adult human beings from marrying each other. What’s more, all 101 agreed that any state that bans gay marriage is shitty.
Marriage is a function of the state. Whether or not you believe it to be more is not germane to this conversation. It is a fact that marriage carries with it exclusive rights and protections under the law, including a litany of unique benefits in matters regarding taxes, estate planning, social security, Medicare, disability, employment, medical care, death, family, housing, consumer protections and visitation rights. For a list of these exclusive rights, open a new window and visit: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/marriage-rights-benefits-30190.html.
Denying any consenting couple the right to marry blocks them from the above rights. Let’s run it though the Logic Machine:
1) Gay and lesbian citizens pay proportionally equal taxes in this country (actually, they pay more on average because they can’t file joint federal tax returns even if they are legally married: http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/26/pf/taxes/gay_marriage_taxes/index.htm).
2) Marital status provides individuals unique legal benefit (as outlined above).
3) Gay and lesbian couples are not legally allowed to marry in 43 states.
4) 1st conclusion: Gay and lesbian citizens are prohibited from receiving equal benefit under the law (based on numbers 2 and 3).
5) Obligations of citizens residing in a state can only rightly be required if these citizens are represented fully by the state (you might disagree, but we submit for your review the concept of “taxation without representation”).
6) Paying taxes is one obligation of citizens residing in a state.
7) Gay couples should not have to pay taxes (based on numbers 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6).
Now look at numbers 1 and 7. There’s an issue that requires our attention. By virtue of the truth-preserving logic above, we’ve arrive at an impasse.
Of course, for this argument to be valid, all of the premises must be true and the subsequent conclusions must be both sound and derived from the premises. We understand this is more logical foreplay than most people care to engage in and so invite you to challenge this argument in the comments below or by emailing email@example.com. For those of you who have kept up, you’ll find that you either have to allow that same-sex couples should be exempt from federal taxes or allow them to tie the knot.
If you disagree, you are dumber than…
If you oppose same-sex marriage and have somehow come this far, you may be feeling abused. You should. But it’s not the gentle folk at shitmove.com kicking your ass. It’s logic.
If the gay-haters in this country traded their fear for logic, they’d realize it’s high time to cancel Jesus’s birthday because the gays are here, they’re queer, and they’re totally about to get gay married on your front fucking lawn (you’ll have to take the Santorum sign down for the ceremony unless you want to see a sign weep).
And look, if this all makes you uncomfortable, we invite you to the positive side of shitiocy. The glass is half full here. Think about it. Lots of gay weddings means lots of gay wedding registries at high-end retailers. Because that’s where they shop. Imagine the surge in sales of scented candles and apple-tini stemware! Because that’s what they buy. Except for the bears. They like bacon, eggs and beard combs. But then the twinks like to shave down there, so Gillette should really increase their production despite the bears (though it’s no secret gays of all stripe prefer the feel of a nice hard Schick). And more lesbian weddings means an increase in registries at Harley- Davidson, a strong uptick for Doc Martens and flannel shirts, and a doomsday rush to the pet store to stock up on catnip. But then there’s the femmes, who like lipstick and read Glamour…
Fuck. There’s a lot of variety here. It’s really hard to categorize a queer. Since that was fruitless (what–no pun?), we’ll pick up the thread of our argument again. The point here is in regard to full marriage rights for same-sex couples. Fuck civil unions. They’re the same devil by a different name. “Separate but equal” arguments are not valid here or anywhere. If logic were not our guide on this front, history would be. Today, reasonable people scoff and shake their heads sadly at the horrid history and very concept of “separate but equal” when it comes to racial segregation. As well they should. But it’s happening again. This logical dead-end has returned in the public discourse regarding marriage rights.
In the near future, Americans will look back on this time with equal disdain and confusion over the fact that our elected officials codified bigotry that targeted gays and lesbians. Those who restrict civil liberties for same-sex couples will be seen through the same filter of due scorn we currently use to look upon politicians who opposed equal protection under the law for citizens of color.
Alas, the shitiots of the world are scared. They have no experience with reason and are disinterested in Civil Rights. They love only their fear and ignorance. A prime example of the poverty of their logic comes out of the Maryland debate over the issue. It won’t exactly shock the shit out of you to learn that, when the topic of marriage equality was introduced in the Maryland House of Delegates, a series of idiotic conflations, hasty generalizations and boner-killing pseudo-logic followed immediately after. Front and most egregiously center stood erstwhile “gay predator” target and elder statesmen Emmett Burns, who urged a calm, level approach to the subject by revealing dramatic personal experiences with “the gays” from more than 60 years ago. Yes, never mind the septuagenarian jowls you see here—it appears Emmett used to add fuel to the fire by Burnsing up the flames.
Hot. If not quite ready to trot.
By his recount, he was approached twice in his Mississippi youth by men wanting to teach him the difference between giving and taking. The level and extremely unemotional circle he draws for himself looks like this (please postpone all critical questions until the vote’s been taken and cue the Droopy Dog voice-over):
1) When I was 12 and 13, two different men asked me to perform some sort of sexual act with their penises.
2) This made me uncomfortable because I did not then, nor do I now, want to do anything sexy with a penis that is not mine.
3) I knew then, as I do now, that having sex with another man was unnatural (no logical premises needed—you quiet your questions!).
4) Therefore, providing equal protection for gay men and women under the law is gross.
5) Did you read number 3?! I think we can all agree on crystal-clear, unloaded terms like “unnatural”. I certainly don’t have to detail it here—I was nearly raped!
What the esteemed gentleman fails to realize is that he is a sexual outlier. He’s entirely too attractive to be judged on the same level as other people. Have another look-see:
He makes guys go gay. And before you accuse us of blaming the victim, consider that two of our male judges turned on Bravo after just one little peek at Emmett Burns. Three of our female judges experienced the double bummer of spontaneous combustion before reaching full climax. And so we relent, allowing for logical exceptions when it comes to Delegate Burns. We see no reason to hold a standard of reason to anyone in his presence. Small wonder he didn’t get more offers to “jump off the diving board”.
Good thing this honest and decent and smart man has been in office since 1995. Good thing he listens to his better angels and baser emotions rather than the arduous implications of critical thought. We were worried he’d hang his jowls in embarrassment after seeing his argument put into writing. But you can relax. We can all relax. This badass is still beaming and can’t wait to tell you how much he hates gay marriage. And he’s a shoo-in for re-election.
So if you ever visit the Maryland House of Delegates for an open session and find yourself in the men’s room, remember—narrow stances only lest you trigger a cascade of horrific memories for the gentle delegate from Baltimore County. And if you happen to see the word “faggot” written on the stall wall, well… we certainly don’t know how it got there.
Tune in throughout the week for more on this topic, including…
Ixnay on the Itshay – Wherein we shame three judges who momentarily went against the majority (The This-Has-Nothing-To-Do-With-Me Judge, The Misunderstander, and the Civil Unioneer).
A Full List of Shitty States Replete with Honorable Mentions
The Big What-If
The Call to Action
There’s more. So much more.
If you’ve been outed as a shitmove.com fan, get around to the proud part and “like” us on Facebook. If you’re still in the closet (what with all the cursing), get your shit sent to you secretly via email or follow us on Twitter @shitmoves. We promise not to tell.