Tweet
I was sitting building a model of the Pentagon out of Oreos and I thought about the Service of Marriage – and the words “Who giveth this woman…” and half the time some toothless ass will stagger forward with a look of anticipated pleasure at the relief of ridding himself of the burden, and he will say, “I do.”
Although it is usually the father, no one questions who this person is as it is equally possible that the woman to be given away is his property by other means – his sister, some woman he found, etc.
No one says, “Who giveth this man…”, do they? That would be stupid because men own things; they are not owned.
Those of you who were homeschooled will also know that correct grammar is that a man marries a woman (to marry – verb transitive - And what do transitive verbs do? They take an object! In this case, the object is a wife.) and a woman is married to a man (to marry – verb intransitive.) You can see how God and the Language He speaks defines the master-servant-property relationship and how this has been carried forward to this very day.
This brings me to the real difficulty of queers marrying – there is no one to give anyone away; there is no one “to be married to someone”; there are only two people, who cannot possibly own one another.
On the other hand, and I am assured they exist outside certain websites, there are lezbeans. Now these are women, so what can they own? How can you “give something to someone who can’t own things?
Think of it – “I have given the cat to the table.” Garbage isn’t it!
So in any law that purports to “marry gays of both sexes” is open to constitutional challenge as being in direct conflict with the Christianity upon which the US was founded and nonsensical before the law.
Checkmate weirdos!
Although it is usually the father, no one questions who this person is as it is equally possible that the woman to be given away is his property by other means – his sister, some woman he found, etc.
No one says, “Who giveth this man…”, do they? That would be stupid because men own things; they are not owned.
Those of you who were homeschooled will also know that correct grammar is that a man marries a woman (to marry – verb transitive - And what do transitive verbs do? They take an object! In this case, the object is a wife.) and a woman is married to a man (to marry – verb intransitive.) You can see how God and the Language He speaks defines the master-servant-property relationship and how this has been carried forward to this very day.
This brings me to the real difficulty of queers marrying – there is no one to give anyone away; there is no one “to be married to someone”; there are only two people, who cannot possibly own one another.
On the other hand, and I am assured they exist outside certain websites, there are lezbeans. Now these are women, so what can they own? How can you “give something to someone who can’t own things?
Think of it – “I have given the cat to the table.” Garbage isn’t it!
So in any law that purports to “marry gays of both sexes” is open to constitutional challenge as being in direct conflict with the Christianity upon which the US was founded and nonsensical before the law.
Checkmate weirdos!
of 
"
.gif "Gunsmilie(1)")
Comment