Wednesday, November 4, 2009


I would like to officially apologize, to the country and to humanity in general, for the State of Maine.

Due in large part to a blatantly false ad campaign that amounted to nothing more than a cheap scare tactic aimed at the uneducated and the willfully ignorant, Maine's Referendum Question 1 passed, allowing a People's Veto of the previously passed law allowing for gay marriage in Maine. According to the Vote Yes campaign, a No vote meant that, basically, all Maine elementary schools would IMMEDIATELY cease any teaching of math, reading, science, etc. and focus singularly and with laser-like precision on teaching Maine's school-age children How To Be Gay.

Laughable as that sounds, it apparently convinced enough fence-sitters to vote yes. The ignorant, intolerant, homophobic a-holes were always going to vote that way, but I am bitterly disappointed that a majority of Maine voters couldn't see through that smoke screen to the real issue, which is that some people feel that it is their God-given right to tell other people whom they may love and how they may live their lives -- even when it affects there own lives NOT. AT. ALL.

"Save traditional marriage!" was their battle cry. Save it from what?! Other people being able to file their taxes a certain way? Which, again, affects them NOT AT ALL. "Oh," they say, "those people are promiscuous, they don't have monogamous, committed relationships." Hmm, a monogamous and committed relationship.... kinda like a, you know, marriage? I shit you not, this was one of the 'arguments' presented. Because, I suppose, straight people are NEVER promiscuous or anything.

"Our children will learn about gay marriage in school!" *insert outraged pearl-clutching here* Yes, heaven forbid we inform children that there are more ways than one to live. We wouldn't want them getting all tolerant and shit. Gotta grow up to be just like their faggot-hating moms and dads!! Bigotry, discrimination, unfounded hate -- these are good, traditional family values!!

But hey, there is a positive thing that we can take away from this: The Power of the People's Veto! So, for the 2010 election, I am starting a petition drive to repeal the right of blonds to marry brunettes. Blonds shall therefore be forced to marry only other blonds, and brunettes only other brunettes (redheads do not in fact exist as actual human beings; therefore they will not be referred to in any way in this petition, as sub-humans are not allowed to marry anyhow). This will lead to two distinct and separate classes of people, which is clearly how God (and Hitler) intended for it to be.

It makes exactly as much sense as denying homosexuals the right to marry.

Who wants to sign my petition?


  1. Hear, hear. I was so sad to read this-this morning.

  2. It never ceases to amaze me how eager people are to force their beliefs on others. IMO there is not enough love in this world -- and I don't give a flying f--- what form it takes!

  3. This is an issue I feel strongly about, even though I have been in a monogamous heterosexual relationship for 39 years. I view it as an issue of basic human rights, and a violation of the establishment clause.

    Perhaps it would be easier to separate the word "marriage" from the legal act. Marriage could be a religious ceremony (see "wedding") and there would be another term for legal unions. Mixed-sex couples would need get exactly the same time of legal union as same-sex couples.