Deviant Login Shop  Join deviantART for FREE Take the Tour

:iconkatiejo911: More from katiejo911

More from deviantART


Submitted on
May 10, 2012
File Size
5.4 KB


12 (who?)
You can't get married.  No, I'm talking to you.  And if you are married, it's going to be annulled.  You may only live with your "spouse" as a citizen of the United States.  You may not be carried on your co-habitant's insurance.  You may not inherit any of your cohab's property when they die. You may not be allowed into the hospital room with them because you are not family. Any children you have go to your cohab's parents because they are their relatives, not you.  And if you decide to go live somewhere else, you get what you came into the house with.  You're a roommate.  You're a booty call.  And if you're being supported by your roommate and have sex with them you are trading sex for goods and services.  In other words, you are a whore.  

If all marriage laws were dissolved tomorrow, this is what would happen to families. And without those laws, our married citizens would have no more rights than your average single person.  Sure, you can have a religious ceremony, but it's not going to be recognized by the state.  Heck, you wouldn't even be able to file taxes together. You'd have to file separately.  When people commit themselves to a marriage, they benefit from certain inalienable rights.

Except, they are being alienated, those rights.  Imagine, finding the woman of your dreams.  She's beautiful, talented, hard working, funny and she loves you as well.  But you can't get married.  Why?  

She's a Capulet.

The Great State of Virginia which gave us no less than eight presidents (Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Harrison, Tyler, Taylor and Wilson) just passed a law that would have those great men rolling in their graves.  It states that Virginia refuses to allow some of it's citizens to exercise their rights.  This has been pushed through by the fundamentalist Christian arm of the republican party.  

Eschewing religion in the formation of our government, our founding fathers would be appalled to find a religious right pushing an agenda that deprived citizens of their rights. In a post - G W Bush world, deprivation of rights has become commonplace. However this is not Virginia's first foray down that road.

Imagine you are in love with a man.  He's bright and handsome, works hard, doesn't drink, goes to your church, and he loves you, too.  But you can't get married.  Why?

He's a negro.

Why is it that Christians have such sway in the Government nowadays?  When did it become the responsibility of the United States to legislate morals?  Of all the Christians who have ever walked the earth, the last one who would go to the state to try to make people do what he wanted was Christ.  This isn't about religion.  This isn't about morals.  This is, as it always is, about money.  If you reduce the number of people participating in lawful marriages, insurance companies save money.  If you cut down on the number of marriages, more people are going to file their own taxes.  If you don't allow some people to inherit through marriage, the state gets to tax the estate.  And if there is no other heir, the state keeps the estate, leaving the survivor with only what was in their name.

I don't understand why reporters let politicians get away with saying outrageous things.  Rick Santorum, on being asked about same sex marriage answer brilliantly with, "Why not two men? Why not three men?  Why not a goat?"  Surely some reporter could have perked up and said, "Three in a marriage is illegal, a goat is not a citizen. Now answer the question."   Human beings come in all different shapes and sizes.  As long as they obey the law and mind their own business, why should anyone be able to deprive them of their rights?  Why do Christians think they have the right to push people around and make them do what they want?  (oh, forgot.  The Spanish Inquisition)

Imagine, the woman you love is having her baby.  It's a long, drawn out labor, but everything is going fine.  When the child emerges, he is perfect, crying and beautiful.  They lay him in his mother's arms while they deliver the placenta.  

Suddenly her blood pressure drops.  The doctor and nurses begin to scramble around.  The pediatric nurse takes the baby to the nursery.  You are shoved out of the room as they work on her.  You pace in the hall.  After what seems like an eternity the doctor comes out, he stops and says, "Are you part of the family?"

You answer, "I'm her spouse."  

He says, "I can only talk to her family."  He walks to the waiting room where he tells her estranged mother and father that she has passed away.  You don't get to see the body.  You aren't allowed at the funeral.  You never see the baby again.

Why?  Because you are a woman.   And God's people have deprived you of your rights.
Same sex marriage issues are not about morals, they're about deprivation of rights.
Add a Comment:
This is very good and it explains how things are and it gets people thinking. If someone was on the fence about the issue this would get them thinking about how it could affect them. This shows the injustice of not allowing gay couples the same rights as straight ones and it gets one to think about how wrong that is and how Jesus would not be the one to shove his ideas down someone's neck like a lot of Christians do these days. If more people read this they could think more of how that would hurt people everywhere and how unjust this is for everyone.
What do you think?
The Artist thought this was FAIR
3 out of 3 deviants thought this was fair.

The Artist has requested Critique on this Artwork

Please sign up or login to post a critique.

Well, I think we all know that the founding fathers, though it is not presented in the constitution, clearly meant for marriage to be between a man and a women. This debate came up in California not all that long ago with Prop 8 where union between same sexes were legalized until it was overthrown by the vote. You claim that marriage is a right for all citizens, your correct it is a right for any man or women to be able to marry. What you do behind private doors to most extent, is not for the public to need to know. Meaning if you want to have a partner then so be it, but the United States doesn't have to recognize it. I realize the post in general was for the sheer right of marriage, but I think we can conclude it stems from gay marriage and gay rights. DOMA was enacted in 1996 by Clinton, one of the few things he did I agreed with, I don't think people want it or readily accept it yet for various reasons. One religion, two people do not want it taught to our children in public schools and from there it stems to many different reasons why no is there answer.

Marriage though a right was intended to be between a man and women, I think your statement of the founding fathers rolling in their graves is correct, I believe if they knew this would be a problem then they would have put it in. If we allow same sex marriage, why not bestiality too? You have a right to own an animal don't you? Well why not a right to marry it too? Or is that because the animal can't consent, well how do you know if he/she/it consents? Maybe they do and you just don't realize it.

It all comes down to what an individual thinks. There is no right answer its a personal answer that each person needs to find. For or against or some just don't care. Its not wrong in any case on how its answered.
If we allow same sex marriage, why not bestiality too?

There are some states that allow bestiality.
There are some states that used to permit polygamy as well. Even in the Bible there are men who had more than one wife. And the presumption that the founding fathers meant for marriage to be between a man and a woman. Clearly sophisticated and well versed in European culture, they were well aware of homosexuality. They did not speak against it. They did speak against religious beliefs running our government.

This isn't about who marries whom, it is about granting rights of contract to citizens equally. Bringing animals into the conversation is ridiculous, as is polygamy. They are both illegal (however I'd be interested to hear about those states, Kitsumekat). You can't grant the rights of a citizen to an animal, therefore they can't enter into a legal marriage. You can't marry a child because a minor can't enter into a legal contract. It is the contract and the rights and privileges which accompany that which are being denied adult American citizens. Religious weddings CAN include (and often do) children, or even animals. If the religious want to patrol their own purview, that is their right. However a legal marriage contract is no more their business than a contract to have your lawn mowed. A lawn mowing contract can only be between a man and a woman? A business merger contract can only be between a man and a woman? A sales contract can only be between a man and a woman? That's horse hockey. And so is a marriage contract that can only be between a man and a woman.

If you don't want to perform the weddings, fine. But as far as the contract goes, mind your own damned business, religious nuts.

By the way, Jesus abhorred capitalism.
I know. I was saying that there are states that allow it so, they can really use that arguement.
God Bless the USA :flagus:
Oklahoma... Arkansas... Heck, all the states in my region, no doubt. :D
PurplePhoneixStar May 14, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Thing is if you want to keep marriage sacred then don't divorce your spouce because they get too old!
Just like there is a Mormon wedding and a Mormon wedding at the Tabernacle, there is a difference between a marriage and a wedding. Catholics could only wed other Catholics at a Catholic church. Otherwise they were DAMNED TO HELL. However, if they were willing to risk eternal damnation for love, they could get married at city hall. The difference here is between a wedding and a civil marriage contract. In ancient Ireland there were over a hundred of forms of marriage from a one night stand to an eternal bond. Each had a purpose and a place.

Religious bullies want us to push away everyone but those they choose to exercise the rights and privileges of a civil marriage contract. It takes a special kind of sexual deviant to want to force everyone to have sex they way they want them to. I believe they are called Dominatrices.
Add a Comment: