Back to Home

This Article is Totally Gay

People are too easily offended by words these days, and euphemisms are popping up like mushrooms.  Our simple, straightforward language is being diluted into a slimy porridge from the addition of these hollow words.

For example, people in wheelchairs were once crippled.  But this term was deemed insensitive, and so after that they became disabled persons.  With this nominal change their quality-of-life improved dramatically, correlating positively with the number of extra syllables.  And most recently, they've become persons with a disability, perhaps in an attempt to make it sound like they volunteered for paralysis or something, and holy shit it's like they're standing and walking now.  

Although this new rhetoric may seem empowering, you don't have to be the head cashier at Wal-Mart to realize that it doesn't change anybody's situation, and makes about as much sense as a man's nipples.

As if this wasn't ridiculous enough, entire countries are up in arms over the merest definition of a word.  What word am I talking about?  You'd think it might be something worthwhile like "El Nino"...I mean seriously, what the hell is El Nino?  I have yet to hear a straightforward explanation that doesn't make my eyes glaze over.  No, it turns out that the word is marriage.

"Marriage is the union between one man and one woman."

What's the fuss about?  Well if you look carefully, you'll notice this definition very neatly excludes the union between two women or between two men.  So without further ado, I think it's time for me to tone things down a bit and try to win everybody over with my views on gay marriage.

By the way, does anybody remember this children's book?

The title always used to crack me up when I was in 3rd grade.  

Anyway, I once had an impromptu debate with some jughead who claimed it was unnatural and even "anti-human" to allow such a thing as gay marriages.  Ya see (said he), anything that doesn't help continue the species is going against nature, and is therefore wrong.  But I won the argument by pointing out that his face was ugly (unnaturally so) and wouldn't help him to have kids anytime soon, so therefore he was wrong.  Then I asked him to close the bathroom door so I could finish taking a shit.

Look everybody, with more than 6.4 billion people on this planet and climbing, you're not a hero for finding some dirtball to shag with and churning out another cabbage.  If there's a small minority of people out there with preferences that preclude making more babies, I say we ought to be giving them all medals instead of a hard time.

So here's my stance on unconventional marriages:

Let 'em.

But hang on, I don't just mean gay marriages.  My position is much more inclusive.  I'm for marriages between cousins.  I'm for marriages between siblings.  I'm for grandparents marrying their grandchildren, and for necrophiliacs marrying whatever rotting corpse they fancy.  We should be able to marry imaginary friends, inanimate objects, and El Nino.  Let's marry dogs, cats, pigs, and dolphins, and then turn it into a reality show on FOX.

Marriage is the union between two or more entities or non-entities.  I think that pretty much covers it.  If it's unlikely to result in more viable offspring on this already overburdened planet, it's OK by me.

"But if we allow same-sex unions, it would irreparably damage the institutions of marriage and family!"

Oh, I didn't think about that.  We certainly wouldn't want anything to besmirch the sanctity of such a spiritual bond between husband and wife.  I mean, if we allowed that damage to occur, who knows where it might lead...regular married couples might even try and do something unheard of, like dissolve that immortal connection as if it never existed, resulting in all sorts of strange family relationships.  Scary stuff, huh?


Back to Home


Like it?  Send me comments.  Hate it?  Send me hate mail.

All submissions become my property and may be posted on this site (if you're lucky).