This morning on the Dennis Prager show, he played a clip of his appearance on the Larry King show last night. The other guest was Perez Hilton. They were debating same sex marriage and whet her it should be legalized. Perez Hilton went straight for the fairness issue. Dennis set forward the reasons why fairness is not an issue. The important issue is that marriage is because a man and a woman both bring something different to the table.

Dennis asked Perez if he believed that men and women were the same. Perez said that they were the same except for external body parts. Obviously Perez has not been around children. Anyone who has raised a boy and a girl knows that boys and girls are different almost from day one. It is not cultural training that makes them different. It is inherent in each sex certain traits that give rise to what they are as adults. Of course, cultural training modifies this to some extent. But the inherent differences are there nonetheless.

For one thing, men and women have their brains wired differently. Women have more connections between the left and right brain than men do. There is nothing any cultural training can do to make that different. It is just a fact. That difference gives women some advantages in certain parts of life. It also gives men certain advantages in other parts of life. There is nothing right or wrong about this. It is just a fact and each of us has to live with the advantages we were given because we were a man or a woman.

Dennis Prager also brought up another great point. If you think that men and women are the same with different body parts, are the boy scouts and girl scouts discriminatory? Perez never answered that question, because the only answer is that boy and girl scouts are not discriminatory. Boys and girls are different and need different organizations to meet their needs.

Perez Hilton brought up that it used to be illegal for blacks and whites to marry. We changed the law to allow that, why not change the law to allow gays to marry? Dennis answered that there is nothing in all religious doctrine or historical secular doctrine that justified the law keeping blacks and whites from marrying. There is no religious or secular doctrine that supports same sex marriage. Dennis also pointed out that there is no difference between a black person and a white person. There is a profound difference between a man and a woman. That is why marriage is there. A man and a woman both bring something to the marriage that two men or two women cannot bring. Also, that is not saying that all marriages are perfect. All marriages are imperfect. Marriages that seem perfect are because you have two committed people that work at it every day.

Perez Hilton tried to say that there are a thousand benefits/rights to married couples that are denied to everyone else. He said that same sex marriage would open up those benefits/rights to everyone. Dennis said that those are issues that can be settled without calling a same sex union, marriage. Marriage should be between a man and a woman. Children are frequently are asked about marriage. If you add sexual confusion by asking, are you going to marry a man or a woman, you are going too far. Children should have examples of men being men and women being women. About 97% of the population is straight. Why should we add sexual confusion to children when they do not need it?

From the debate between Perez Hilton and Dennis Prager it was obvious who won. Dennis won on the issues. Dennis had all the facts on his side. Dennis had all the religious, social and cultural issues to back him up in the debate. All Perez Hilton had, was the emotional issue of “fairness” or “equality”. All of us should be treated equal. But, all of us do not have equal rights. There are some things I cannot do because I do not have the right. Other people can do those things because they have the right. That is fair because I have not earned the right. Until I earn the right, I have no basis in asking for the right. Some rights are God given, like freedom of speech. Others are earned, like higher pay because of an education. Most rights are earned. Many people hear the word rights and expect it to be given to them as a God given thing. We are getting away from the policy of earning.

Listening to the Dennis Prager show, I heard something quite disturbing. He was telling us about the beauty pageant that was held over the weekend. Miss California was given a question from one of the judges. The question was approximately, New Hampshire recently approved gay marriages. Should other states follow their example? Miss California said approximately, that she was glad she lived in a country where people could believe what they wanted to. But, that she and her family believed that marriage is between one man and one woman. Miss California came in first runner-up in the event.

One of the judges was outraged. After the event, he made a U-Tube video where he called her stupid and other names for not saying that gay marriage was a good thing. This judge said that if Miss California had won he would have gone on stage and caused a scene.

That is really disturbing to me. Things are starting to get out of hand where people that believe in gay marriage are concerned. Those of us who believe in traditional marriage are now not just wrong; we are stupid and a lot of other unprintable names. The next thing you know, we will not be able to voice our opinions at all. The left believes it knows more than all of recorded history and every religious and secular leader throughout time. That is really scary. When something has worked well for thousands of years, why change it?

The real thrust behind all this gay marriage talk where anyone who disagrees with gay marriage is now not just wrong but stupid and worse, is that the left wants to control the agenda. The way they control the agenda is to intimidate everyone into keeping silent. If they keep calling everyone bad names for supporting tradition, then people will start keeping quiet. That is how they imposed political correctness and other leftist changes in the language. Now words do not even mean what they have meant for hundreds of years.

What is happening right before our eyes is that our free speech is being taken away from us. It started with political correctness. We let that go because it seemed harmless at first. Now the left has gone beyond political correctness into changing the thoughts of everyone. If they cannot win the discussion of ideas, they will win with intimidation. They will bully everyone into believing, or at least saying, what they want them to say. When they achieve that goal, then there will not be anyone to stop them from completely dominating the culture. They almost do so now, so this last step will just complete the process.

Those of us who believe in truth and right need to speak out and say that we will not be intimidated. I will not stop saying that I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. Marriage is not between two people of the same sex. The reason behind marriage is to have and raise children. Two people of the same sex cannot have children through natural means. They are incapable of doing what the purpose of marriage is, so they fall outside the definition of marriage. If you want to call their unions something else, then that is fine. But, they are not marriage and never will be marriage, no matter how much the left cries that they are.

We need to take a stand here and now. Our rights are being trampled by the left. They believe that they know more than the combined world. They want to impose their failed doctrines on the American people. If we do not take a stand now, we will lose our freedoms and America will be a historical country. We cannot let that happen. The Tea Parties were a first step, but we need to continue. Stand up and be counted. Do not let yourself be intimidated by the left. You will end up stronger, though you may catch a few arrows.

Yesterday, Vermont became the first state that ratified a bill authorizing people of the same sex to marry. They had to override the veto of the Governor to complete the task. All the other states that have authorized same sex marriage have been because of unelected judges. Dennis Prager discussed this issue on the way to work today.

What is the real issue with same sex marriage? Is it the rights that married people have? No, same sex couples can get the same rights if they so choose. Is it to get the same benefits that married people have? Maybe, but these benefits can be obtained in ways other than getting married.

Then what is the real reason? The answer may lie in the acronym used by the Gays and Lesbians, LGBT. That stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender. The gays and lesbians claim that they are that way because it is genetic. People are bisexual and transgender because of choice. That would indicate that the goal of the organization is to blur the line between male and female. If you blur the line between male and female, then bisexual and transgender become more acceptable. Also as an offshoot, gays and lesbians are not considered different at all.

Why throw away thousands of years of Jewish and Christian tradition just because a few people say so? Shouldn’t we acknowledge the wisdom of the ages? There has to be a reason that the Jews and Christians adopted the marriage covenant between men and women only. The reason is obvious. If you want society to continue, you have to have children. The only way to have children is for men and women to get together and create a child. Marriage then protects the woman and children from starvation and death. Traditionally, the man is obligated to care for the woman and children. Both the man and the woman then train the children in what is expected of them to make them good members of the society. This practice has successfully continued civilization to our day. It is a successful practice.

We started to modify that practice when we needed women to work during World War II. At that time, women had to go to work because most of the men were off fighting in the war. Women liked earning a paycheck. When men came back from the war, many women had a difficult time giving up the paycheck to become the housewife again. That started women working. In our time, women have to work to provide enough money to pay for the houses that we own. Generally, men also do not earn enough money to have a wife and children at home like they did before World War II.

Gays and Lesbians say that changing the definition of marriage will not have any impact on society. I believe they are wrong. It will take a few years, but I believe that changing the definition of marriage will confuse the gender roles that men and women have had for thousands of years. In other countries where they have relaxed the marriage laws, marriages are much fewer. That means more women raising children without the aid of a husband. I do not want to sound like a male chauvinist pig, but I believe that men are essential in a family. Boys need to learn how to be men and girls need to know how men are supposed to behave. Just like boys need to learn to respect their mother and sisters, girls need to learn how to be women from their mothers. A family where one of these roles is missing is not a complete family. Studies show that children are less likely to be involved in crime if they come from a home with a father and a mother. I am not saying that there are not good people that were raised by just their father or their mother. I am just saying that in general, children born and raised to a married father and mother turn out better.

If you want a predictor of crime, one of the best statistics you could use is did the person come from a one parent household. If you want a predictor of poverty, one of the best statistics you could use is did the person come from a one parent household. The percentages are against one parent households being successful. There are many that are, but there is a larger number that do not make it. There are just not enough statistics on children raised by two fathers or two mothers to be valid, but my guess is that they are not much better than single parent households. Only one gender is represented. A successful family has both genders as role models.

I have been successfully married for almost 37 years. During that time, each of us has had a role in raising our children. Both of us taught them different things and that turned them into whole individuals. Our children laugh when they identify that this or that trait came from me. It makes us closer as a family. I frequently see my father in the things that I do and say. I am sure that my sons do the same thing. As I look back, I would not change much. I would still marry and raise my seven wonderful children, even if I knew how much of a problem that was going to be.

Proposition 102 passed almost 6 weeks ago. There are still protests from the gay community over its passage. In fact, there were even editorials in the Arizona Republic this morning about proposition 102 and what it meant. To me, this is just amazing. I would never have thought that we would be having these kinds of discussions and demonstrations over a month after the vote.

Proposition 102 had one agenda and only one agenda. That agenda was to confirm in the Arizona Constitution that marriage in Arizona was between one man and one woman. That is the way it has been since Arizona was made a state and so it shall remain. The purpose of putting it in the Arizona Constitution was to make sure that no Supreme Court justice would declare it unconstitutional. We have a law that says exactly what the new prop 102 amendment says, but it is just a law and some judge could overturn the will of the people. To avoid that, we had to put it in the Arizona Constitution.

Since marriage was started, thousands of years ago, it has meant that it was between one man and one woman. There have been some cultures where polygamy was practiced. But, even there, marriage was between men and women, not men and men or women and women.

What is the purpose of marriage? The purpose of a marriage is to bring children into the world and to raise them to adulthood. Traditionally this has meant that it required one man and one woman to get together to produce children. To protect the children and the rights of the mother who raised them, marriage was started. This gave the mother and children the right to the income of the father (the traditional breadwinner). Religions embrace marriage because a strong marriage makes strong religious people and that makes a strong religion. The state recognizes marriage because it is in the best interest of the state to encourage the production of children and their protection to adulthood.

Gay people are asking that we recognize “marriage” between two people of the same sex. On the surface, this may sound reasonable. But, it is not reasonable from the perspective of the state. There is no interest in a union of two men or two women from the perspective of the state. They are not going to produce children and therefore not raise them to adulthood. There is no need to protect the rights of the children produced and the parent that raises the children as no children can be expected. Now, I do know that two women can have children by artificial means. But, that is actually introducing a “man” into the situation. The state cannot and should not concern itself with things that are not “natural”. In other words, the state should concern itself with matters that would concern “both” parents. If these mothers who have children by artificial methods want to include the “father” in the matter, then the state would need to get involved. Since they do not want the father involved, the state should not be involved.

Proposition 102 said nothing about homosexuals. It was not aimed at homosexuals. Homosexuals still h have the same rights as anyone else to marry someone of the opposite sex. Homosexual people say that they do not want to marry someone of the opposite sex. They want to marry someone of the same sex. As far as the state is concerned, that is not a “marriage”. If they want the state to recognize this union, they should advocate for some type of arrangement and call it something other than marriage. The term marriage is when men and women marry each other. In England, they call an arrangement of two people of the same sex a “civil union”. That works in England and would work here. You can give “civil unions” the same “rights” as marriages, just do not call it a marriage and everyone will be happy.

This is why I do not understand all the protesting over proposition 8 in California and proposition 102 here. If they want a marriage type situation, just work for something called a civil union and nobody would fight you over it. You could have that tomorrow. But, it is more fun to equate the civil rights movement with the gay agenda. That way they feel important. The civil rights movement was to correct a real problem of discrimination. The gay agenda is just an attempt to create a problem where one does not exist. When you saw a black person, you knew they were black and could discriminate against them. When you see a gay person, you have no idea the person is gay unless that person tells you they are gay. As far as I am concerned, that is more information than I want to know about the person.

I know that some of my students are gay. I do not ask and I could not tell you which ones are gay. I did have one student self identify himself as gay and he told me that he appreciated the way I taught the class. I thanked him and asked why. He said because he was treated just like every other student. He said he would spread the word in the gay community that I was a teacher that they could trust to be fair. If he knew my religion, he might wonder. But, I always treat my students how they want to be treated. I start out treating them all as adults and continue to do so until they act up. Then, they get treated as the child they are acting like.