Oh, the irony....

Original post

The links would all make good examples for a course in logical fallacies, but let's assume for a moment that this blogger truly believes in these reasons. Apparently, we need the government to protect heterosexual marriage in order to create peace between the two genders, because otherwise adults would behave like my 7-year-old and 8-year-old and only hang out with their own genders, thus increasing gender separatism and friction. Good to know.

This blogger then proves that he's committed to improving relations between men and women by posting charming stuff like this

So, what's the only thing more persuasive than a childless man arguing that the government should be able to ban abortion because it has nothing to do with a pregnant woman's body? It's having a single, childless man, who lives with his parents, watches Stargate, resents Shabbat because it would cut into his ability to play on the computer 24/7, and enjoys saying things like "go back to your kitchen, you dumb bitch" defend traditional heterosexual marriage as being necessary for good relations between the sexes, and needing government protection from lifestyles that threaten it.

So - should the government ban boorish and sexist behavior? What about being a geek?

Personally, if politicians see a need to strengthen traditional marriage, I'd suggest:

1. Not impregnating the housekeeper, especially the same week that you impregnate your wife.

2. Not impregnating your mistress while your wife is dying of cancer.

3. Not going to washroom stalls with boys if you are married.

4. Not flying to your mistress in South America.

5. Get serious about requiring some sort of premarital counseling before marriage, making family life education and interpersonal skills an integral part of the high school curriculum, and making sure that access to good quality marital counseling is available regardless of income.