Marriage Sickos Invade the Corporate Boardrooms!
Okay. Let's confront this whole gay marriage problem head on, shall we?
George W. Bush and the Republican Party are deeply, deeply concerned that the Institution of Marriage is in danger of being destroyed. The threat? The existence of marriages that are not between one man and one woman.
So, let's take this principle at face value: The challenge that threatens the Institution of Marriage is that there are some people who want to create marriages in which the two partners are something other than one man and one woman. So, if we are to understand the Republican point of view, the problem really isn't just gay marriage. It's that people are starting to create marriages that just don't follow the old formula of one man + one woman = one marriage.
We're startled to admit it, but we've found that the Republicans are right. There is an epidemic of marriages out there that do not involve just one man and one woman. In fact, some of these marriages are so far out that they don't even involve one man or one woman.
This, my friends, is the real problem: The Republicans are not going far enough. The Institution of Marriage is under assault from a torrent of business cliches.
It's hard to believe, but it's true. Business institutions are in the process of destroying the Institution of Marriage by arranging sacrilegious, alternative relationships that they call "marriage", but do not fit the traditional definition of a marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman.
These so-called marriages are more than just perverted. They are profoundly inhuman.
Consider the following examples:
On July 30, 2002, Businessweek reported on George Whiteside, a professor of chemistry at Harvard University (Don't we all know what that means!) who was promoted through the ranks of that educational institution to take a role of moral guidance over the children of America's wealthiest families in spite of the fact that he admits spending his teenage years "washing glassware" and "pouring coal tar through holes to measure how long it took to seep through"! It is not, therefore, so surprising that Professor Whiteside has grown up to take the outrageous step of proposing, in front of all his impressionable students, that marriage take place, not between one man and one woman, but between "nanotech and biotech"! Disgusting!
Not to be outdone by the Businessweek nonconformists, Telephony Online, a Primedia publication, released an article in March of 2003 describing "a marriage of convenience" between Wi-Fi and mobile data, saying "mobile data and Wi-Fi are like strangers in the night, exchanging glances..." Writer Dan O'Shea glibly calls the two "paramours", as if that's okay, as if we're not supposed to judge this kind of anything-goes relationship, as if we're just supposed to applaud as the Institution of Marriage is destroyed by mobile telecommunications! How wanton!
Just this February, Business Day, a publication that is frighteningly available to children in an online format at public libraries across America, described with glowing enthusiasm the same kind of nontraditional marriage written about by Businessweek the year before, in which a new kind of business ceremony without a legal marriage license has the goal of "mixing wired with wireless" to create a "marriage of technologies" and allow an illicit "convergence of voice and data"! Of course, this is a natural outgrowth of the 1960's culture of if-it-feels-good-do-it hippies and communists!
It's not just in America that the new sick business marriage agenda is trying to uproot traditional Christian values of marriage. Oh no! On a web site that calls itself "Marketing Web", but which anonymous insiders suggest may be a kind of online "meat market" for hedonistic heathens trying to "make a deal", we read that in South Africa, Woolworth's Food stores and Engen Quickshops have arranged "a marriage of convenience". Referring to this godless marriage, Woolworths executive Amanda Graham seemed to promote a free love agenda for the whole South African business community, saying, "What I think we've really learned is the term not just 'convenience' but 'ultra convenience'. It literally is. You can pull up in your car ... and run in and run out." Do you see the trend here? First we encouraged the South Africans to get rid of apartheid, and now powerful businesspeople think that they can just go around arranging marriages so that they can get a quickie and then break up when it stops being convenient for them. Well, my grandparents were married for 43 years, and they didn't get a divorce when my grandmother started fancying the milkman. No sir! They worked at it!
As far back as 1999, Contingency Planning and Management, the leader in global business community, proposed a "marriage of craft and technology". Pardon me, but that's not a relationship between one man and one woman! Do you think that we can reduce marriage down to a mechanical formula of pieces and parts that fit together to fulfill some kind of carnal function! Where is the love of the blessed sacrament?
Oh, but the movement to destroy the Institution of Marriage goes back even further than that. In 1992, two malcontents who call themselves Lawrence Rudner and Mary Shafer published an article in which they actually had the gall to suggest that the rights of marriage be extended to computers and statistics! The title of their article admitted as such: "A Marriage of Computers and Statistics". There's no denying what they were really up to, is there? They called their idea "resampling". Well, isn't that a nice euphemism for the rejection of traditional moral values!
In January, 2000, Salon (Salon - doesn't that name just conjure up images of casual sex and opium?) wrote an entire article about a marriage that took place between AOL and Time Warner, two huge media companies. Apparently, the whole tawdry thing was arranged online!
Even Christians are falling off the path! George W. Bush says we ought to support a constitutional amendment to define marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman, but some cultish group called Insight for Living started trying to use a Christian web site to promote the odd idea that a marriage ought to be between two men and one woman, saying "A Christian marriage is a total commitment of a man and a woman to the person of Jesus Christ and to one another." Well, pardon me, but that sounds kind of kinky, doesn't it? I mean, does Jesus sleep in the middle of the bed in that marriage? That's downright untraditional! It gets even worse when the author of the article suggest that people married to each other and Jesus at the same time "grow closer to God in your marriage". So, these men and women are supposed to get some good loving from the Father and the Son at the same time?!? Eeeew.
Friends, the time has come for us to rise up and get huffy. Like the Republicans say, a marriage is supposed to take place between one man and one woman only, and any references to any other arrangements are just plain wrong. The Massachusetts liberal agenda of casual business relationships has gone too far, infecting corporate boardrooms across America with casual talk of "marriage between technology and marketing" or "a marriage between infrastructure and account planning" or even "a marriage between ISO standards and human resource needs".
This is not what I read about in the Bible, friends! It is an abomination! Let's call George W. Bush to account, and stop this stampede of business cliches degrading the word "marriage" to refer to just some kind of business school metaphor for getting it on and having a good time with no thought of Jesus Christ our Savior!
If we had abstinence-only sex education in our schools, would this ever have happened?
Looking for political buttons or refrigerator magnets? Take a look-see over at these Progressive Political Buttons and Magnets