(function() { (function(){function c(a){this.t={};this.tick=function(a,c,b){var d=void 0!=b?b:(new Date).getTime();this.t[a]=[d,c];if(void 0==b)try{window.console.timeStamp("CSI/"+a)}catch(l){}};this.tick("start",null,a)}var a;if(window.performance)var e=(a=window.performance.timing)&&a.responseStart;var h=0=b&&(window.jstiming.srt=e-b)}if(a){var d=window.jstiming.load;0=b&&(d.tick("_wtsrt",void 0,b),d.tick("wtsrt_","_wtsrt", e),d.tick("tbsd_","wtsrt_"))}try{a=null,window.chrome&&window.chrome.csi&&(a=Math.floor(window.chrome.csi().pageT),d&&0=c&&window.jstiming.load.tick("aft")};var f=!1;function g(){f||(f=!0,window.jstiming.load.tick("firstScrollTime"))}window.addEventListener?window.addEventListener("scroll",g,!1):window.attachEvent("onscroll",g); })();

Tuesday, June 20, 2006

Things That Need Reform


1: Marriage/Divorce Statutes:

To start, let me say that I advocate the elimination of all state recognized “marriages”. I personally think that government should not have a say when it comes to who “marries” whom, just like they should have no say in selling a car, or buying a house, or thousands of other legal contracts that are executed every day. That said, on the face of things in America, there are laws on the books that regulate marriage that seem to protect abused women and children, uphold the sanctity of a union in a religious context, to empower the oppressed woman, blah, blah and blah. In reality, the current laws that regulate marriage and divorce are in place to fill the wallets of greedy divorce lawyers at the expense of the duped public. Yes you read that right… the laws that you thought were there to protect you have no other purpose then to make lawyers rich. Divorce lawyers fleece billions of Dollars in fees every year, raping the system they created from Joe and Jane Six-Pack, just so they can buy a new Benz every year.

So what would be the solution?

A: All marriages are no longer recognized by the state. Who could object to this? If the marriage is based on religion, it is sanctioned by God himself, and therefore supersedes any human laws; so the married couple is bound by God’s law, and state regulation is unnecessary and irrelevant; if based on secular contact law, see section B.

B: People that wish to enter a marriage contract can do so by writing it themselves, with the help of a lawyer if need be. Make no mistake about it; getting married is signing a binding contract, just as a prenuptial agreement is. Why is one contact revered as the pinnacle of love and trust, while the other considered the exact opposite? Two sides of the same coin if you ask me… a binding contract is a binding contract. Until a formula is created that can accurately quantify human emotions, religious devotion, and/or purpose of will and/or intent, all marriage contracts as they are currently consecrated are shams and frauds on both sides. Everybody knows this, but nobody wants to admit it.

Final Solution: Eliminate state-licensed marriage.

2: The Legal Status of Two Vices: Prostitution and Marijuana

As far as prostitution goes, the idea that this is illegal is silly. Often named “the world’s oldest profession”, I would tend to agree. Without boring you with the history of the libido, prostitution has been, and always will be one of the pillars of civilization. The gross definition of prostitution is the payment of a party to another in currency or barter, for the exchange of sexual services. Anybody care to tell me what in essence differentiates paying somebody a hundred bucks for a screw at the Notell Motel, and paying for a few “dates” with a “somebody you like” that end’s with the same result? You know what I’m saying. You pay for sex one way or another, why should paying for it upfront be illegal when it is largely the end-game anyway? Anti-prostitution laws, the way that they are written, are like saying that it’s O.K. to get drunk, but it’s illegal to purchase alcohol!

Legal pot, well there is a tricky one. On the simple basis of clearing out some prison space for some real criminals, I’m all for it. Since most habitual pot smokers are morons anyway, what as a society do we have to loose? There are some medical benefits for cancer patients perhaps, and if they have cancer, I say: “Let them some weed, man!” Would you deny a cancer victim this simple pleasure on the basis of some arcane law? They have two feet in the grave anyway. How may drunks have you seen beat their women or otherwise harm people? How many heads have you seen do something similar? None, because habitual pot smoking saps will power from people, and in general makes them lazy and irresponsible. Consider this as well: Why is Cannabis so reviled by the American government? Is it that it’s so extraordinarily easy to grow, cultivate, and refine that regulation would be nearly impossible?

Exercise: Write down all the names of everybody over the age of 16 (including yourself) that you have met. Now put a check beside anybody that you know has smoked or does smoke pot, and an X beside who has not.

Final Solution: Decriminalize both prostitution and ganja smoking; it’s realistic and practical.

-Tommy

3 Comments:

Blogger ordinarygirl said...

For once I think I agree with just about everything you wrote. I see no reason why the government needs to be involved in any of this.

6/20/2006 10:10 AM  
Blogger Venjanz said...

Im really suprised that so many gays want leagal marriage. Don't they realize that what they are doing is demanding that the government step in and regulate their relationships?

6/22/2006 4:59 PM  
Blogger ordinarygirl said...

Well, with marriage comes a lot of government benefits. There are a lot of restrictions around "family" from who can visit you in the hospital to who is authorized to make decisions about your care. I think the best solution would be to get rid of government sponsored marraiges and go to contracts and religious/personal ceremonies. But you know that's never going to happen.

6/23/2006 9:21 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home