A sweet Vidalia onion really adds to the banquet table. What do unions bring to the table? Many people like onions as little as they like bunions, but the swelling of the toe may be more of a result of having angrily kicked something. Onions, on the other hand, are usually a matter of opinion.

Labor unions began out of necessity for the purpose of good ...but, today they often spend most of their time and money defending that which is very wrong.  Most of you who are in favor of unions know this ...but, ignore it out of convenience, because you also feel you reap many benefits.  But, enough on that ...let's move on to something that moves beyond company, to the federal level.  Granted that special interest groups have brought it to the federal level ....but, at least this post is moving on.

On the federal level, the Supreme Court is getting involved in something that I think is beyond their jurisdiction.  You may ask what is higher than the Supreme Court in authority ...but, if you don't know, I will be compassionate.  And of course, you have my heart's desire to perhaps lend some understanding to the subject.  It is the spring of 2013, and it may go down in history ...the result of this discussion of marriage.

On Facebook, I see best friends say they are married ...and it has nothing to do with being gay, just referring to being best friends.  You could also post and say you are married to a tree.  Your neighbors may be a bit 'stumped' if they see you talking to and hugging a tree ...so you may want to put up a privacy fence.  But, on the other hand, you may be proud of your relationship.  You could name the tree Liberace, since it gets a new ring every year.

So, why this debate over marriage?  Let's be fair and truthful about this.  It is inaccurate to use the argument that a young child would be denied his two mommies, if gay marriage is not approved.  I've seen many posts and read the arguments which have no foundation at all ...it's just a dishonest attempt to rally emotions.  If a woman has a child, it is her child and remains her child unless a court rules otherwise.  The fact that a child has by claimed definition, two mommies, it is only because it has already been accepted.  If I don't approve of my neighbor saying he is married to a tree, I will not go to court for legal action to have the tree removed ...nor for any of the saplings.  The fact is, that gay people have had their lives for a long time, and no one has done anything to usurp that.

So, the real debate involves forcing institutions to participate in something they don't want to.  This is not my imagination. They've already attempted to penalize voluntary charitable organizations that don't want to be involved in contraceptive issues, or don't want to be any part of the promotion of abortions. But, in the case of marriage, there are always the availability for civil unions ...don't tell me you can't readily find someone who welcomes the making of another buck.


But, that's nor good enough for those pushing for this movement.  It is not really for their rights, it's to take away the rights of those who don't want to be involved.  An example, is the Superbowl.  The winning coach usually gets baptized with a huge jug of Gatorade.  Do they have the right to demand churches fill their baptismals with Gatorade, so all fans of the winning team can be baptized together?  This seems ridiculous, but it also involves a definition.  Likewise, no one is going to take legal action against a person who says they are 'married' to their best friend, on Facebook.  Nor are they going to infringe upon the rights that you already have.  But, don't force institutions that have different beliefs to participate in things that are against their beliefs.

You may say there are churches that want to participate, but that State's government will not make it legal.  You have sort of a point there, but let me make one more point before addressing that one.  I was not surprised that their are gay churches ...but, I was surprised when I read that there are also mosques that are considering performing gay marriage ceremonies.  I was under the wrong impression that if someone entered a mosque with that intention, that they would be better prepared for a funeral instead of a marriage.  But, I consider that a violent reaction that is not common ...and I know of no church that would condone any such violent position.  I am not totally naive ...I do know radical churches do exist, but nobody that I associate with supports that sort of talk or behavior.

I am now going to address the previous statement that I made about not forcing institutions that have different beliefs.  It so happens that an institution is not just a building.  An institution such as marriage is something that is sanctioned by God.  If you get involved in any type of behavior that is not clearly God's way, please do not act like it is.  If you get into a drunken brawl, I will not be there to stand against you.  If you cheat on your taxes, I will not be there to say to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's.  But, there is no court ruling that says how much you can drink ...unless you live in New York perhaps.  I often hear more support for gay rights, than against ...and most people live how they choose.  The thing I don't like is for our Supreme Court to define it ...when our Supreme God already has.

I do believe in what the Bible says.  But, some people would fault me for having those beliefs.

Isaiah 5:20, states, "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!"