Thursday, March 28, 2013

The Bastardization of Marriage

The drumbeat to applaud aberrant behavior is reaching a crescendo.  Already, liberal news outlets have declared a victory for same-sex marriage, even though the Supreme Court hasn’t ruled either way.  This despite the fact that a majority of Americans are against the deviancy of a time honored institution.  So what is ultimately driving this issue?
As it is with illegal immigrants gaining lawful status in the United States, the main issue seems to be benefits.  A New York woman filed suit for the following reasons:

 On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will take up the federal Defense of Marriage Act, the 1996 federal law that defines marriage as between one man and one woman.
The law prevents same-sex couples who are legally married from receiving a range of federal tax, pension and other benefits that otherwise are available to heterosexual married couples.

The plaintiff in the case is 83-year-old Edith Windsor, who lived with her partner Thea Spyer in New York City for more than four decades.
She sued the federal government after she was forced to pay $363,053 in estate taxes when Spyer died in 2009 because DOMA didn’t recognize their marriage, even though the state of New York did. The two were in married in Canada in 2007.

 Notice the complaint isn’t about confiscatory taxation, which is what the argument should be about.  No, this is about forcing a minority view upon the majority.   Many family owned businesses are treated the same way as this lesbian woman.  Maybe we should have intrafamily marriage rights.  That way generational marriage within the family can pass benefits and businesses onto their progeny without paying an inheritance tax.
F.A. Hayek wrote about the Progressives' bastardized of the language.  Rush Limbaugh spoke about it today:


No comments: