Politics: DOMA-Frog Legs For Dinner

 

Emperor Augustus (63 BCE - 14 CE).

Emperor Augustus (63 BCE – 14 CE). (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

There is no question that the marriages have been around since one could recall the beginning of time. However, it was under Emperor Augustus when marriage became more of a… ” legal institution”. 

 
 Augustus’s Leges Juliae (Julian Laws) of 18 – 17 BC attempted to elevate morals and increase the population by encouraging marriage and having children. It also attempted to legitimize natural children by having the parents marry in order to acknowledge financial responsibility for them (In addition, the law punished adultery with banishment and financial penalties).
 
Fast forward to 2013 and the country is dead smack in the middle of a moral and legal debate over same sex persons wanting to be a part of the institution of marriage. At the core of such arguments is whether or not to treat same-sex relationships exactly the same as traditional marriages. This article will approach this issue from a law abiding stand point:
 
Now I know there is someone in West Hollywood, CA yelling at their screen and saying “you cant tell someone who to love!!!” well, maybe not, but emotions have no bearing on the law or on our governmental decisions. Moreover, the status quo (existing state or condition [Websters]) can not simply get changed on a whim every time someone gives an emotion based argument. If that were allowed then the status quo would need changing every other day as emotions are quite unstable, and so this argument holds no weight or value in such a circumstance.
 
Another popular argument against same-sex couples and marriage involves the “sacrament” of marriage. On the surface this appears to be another emotional based argument…but hold on…the Vatican Bank is a privately held institution, it is the institute for the works of religion. This gives way for a very strong legal foundation and therefore carries some weight.
 
The question now becomes what about the people? What are the majority of the people saying  and is the majority the ones screaming the loudest? Is this debate truly a debate or is it just being harped on by a few water torture like screams intended to interrogate the majority into submission?
 
If marriage was made a legal institution to give legitimacy to children and create a fiduciary accountability system for those parents, then the challenge to the status quo being based on whether or not to treat same-sex couples the same as straight couples could be without merit. No matter how you feel about same-sex couples, love them or hate them, agree or disagree one thing remains clear…same sex couples can not have unplanned children. legally their is no need for them to marry (this is not to say they should not have certain rights in case of the death of their partner) “marriage” as a legal institution is not and was not intended to prove that one group is like the other or to satisfy someones hurt feelings but rather to satisfy a need in the community.
 
In the end, we have possibly gotten caught up in all of our personal belief’s but when it comes down to voting, time and time again the people vote in favor of the law, which is devoid of emotion.
 

I leave you with these words from my late grandmother, she said, ” In order to cook a frog for dinner, you can not just throw it into the hot water it will recognize the heat and simply jump right out…if you want to cook it, you have to gentle place it into cold water then slowly turn up the heat… by the time the frog realizes you tricked him, he is all ready for dinner…In other words my dear, be aware of someone changing your mind for no good reason…if their point is to compete with you then their outcome maybe for personal victory only.”