More gay marriage stuff

I got another e-mail late last night from a friend in California telling why I should vote against the gay marriage initiative again. (I voted against it the first time, but have moved since the Supreme Court ruled against the voter's rights.)

Please realize that while there are numerous reasons cited in the e-mail, they didn't cover the main reason I voted against it. I had a friend specifically ask me if I felt threatened by the gay marriage initiative, and I told her right out - no, I don't feel threatened, nor do I feel it threatens my marriage.

Why I did vote against the gay marriage initiative is because I think it gives people justification for making a choice that I believe is wrong. I believe that who you fall in love with is a choice, not a magical mystical thing that happens. You choose, regardless of DNA. And like any choice, it comes with consequences. The Gay Marriage initiative removes the consequences for having made that choice. That is what I have a problem with - the seeming removal of consequence. To me, if you make the choice to be "partnered" with someone of the same sex, you should know the "consequence" of your actions is that your future choices are going to be limited.

I personally think that part of the problem is the entitlement factor. We seem to think that we are entitled to the same as everybody else, when that is neither what the Constitution says nor is it what it implies. It says life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That anyone is given health insurance through work is a benefit, not a right. That one's loved ones are added on to that insurance is a benefit, not a right. If you want insurance for your spouse, then either pay for it or find a job with that benefit. If you want insurance for your dog, then either pay for it or find a job with that benefit. If you want insurance for your prized gold fish, then either pay for it or find a job with that benefit. If you can't find a job that has that benefit, then your choices are limited. That isn't unconstitutional, that is life. When I wanted life insurance, I bought it independent of Randy's work. He has an "independent" policy as well. Health insurance is more expensive independent of work FOR A REASON - because one's work helps pay for it as a benefit of working there. IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE LOWER BENEFITS, THEN DON'T WORK THERE ANY MORE! Insurance companies already cover "domestic partners", and even "life partners". If yours doesn't, then perhaps you should realize that insurance ISN'T A RIGHT, IT IS A BENEFIT!!!!

Enough rant. I am far from perfect, and I make choices I am not proud of, for sure. But when I repent of the choices I make that are mistakes, I "make it right" by fixing it as much as I can instead of "making it right" by changing the rules.