I noticed that blogs that cause controversies are blogs that get hits. Firebee recently wrote a blog about evolution vs creationism. I supported the evolutionist side becuase I feel that creationism limits God's power. If you had infinite power, making the entire universe in just 6 days seems boring. I want big bangs. Besides, the scientific evidence all supports evolution anyway. If you try to claim that the bible is good enough evidence, remember, the bible said that the Earth was the center of the universe and that pi is exactly three. Parts of the bible are excellent for trying to figure out how to live your life, but it's not that hot at doing science.

I got annoyed that people seemed to ignore scientific evidence and basic facts, many seemed proud to be scientifically illiterate. I thought "How could some one be this foolish, not to pay attention to class at least?" but that's when it hit me. Firebee didn't post that blog to debate evolution or creationism, he wanted blog views. If I want blog views, I need controversy. So I'm starting a series of blogs garaunteed to piss you off at least once.

Here goes: Gay marriage. I favor it.

For millenia, marriage has been defined not solely by the requirements of reproduction, but by cultural and religious views. For example, early judaism, mormonism, and modern day islam all included polygamy as an accepted, and even encouraged practice. In ancient greece, 30 year old men would hold their 15 year old boyfriends in higher esteem than their 13 year old wives. Marriage is not a consistant feature of human society, it has not always been a "one man, one woman" institution.

The one thing marriage has always been is religious. People get married in churches, thier church establishes rules for who can marry who. The idea of marriage conferring certain legal rights and status is a recent development, only beginning in the late 1700s. Since marriage has always been religious, is it correct for government to get involved in who can and who can't get married? I support getting the government out of the marriage license business all together. The government should instead issue a civil union to any pair of individuals over the age of 18 and consenting. This civil union would grant all the tax, property, and healthcare rights currently associated with marriage. Then, if a couple wants to be called married, they can go and find a church willing to do it. If a church was willing to marry a man to a banana, then let them. Just don't give them a civil union.

Therefore, I feel that gays have the right to get married, in a church willing to do it, and should get all the rights of a married couple through a civil union. There are too many physical traits like hair whorls, finger lengths, and the proportion of limb to torso size that are all correlated to homosexuality to make being gay a choice. You can't choose which way your hair grows, afterall. This fact puts sexual orientation in the same classification as race or disability, it's just something your born with, and therefore should not be discriminated against.

And besides, who would want to stop two hot russian supermodel lesbians from marrying each other.