Israel: Who's Got Your Back?

Yesterday, President Obama told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that when it comes to Iran, "We've got your back." However, based on the relationship between Mr Obama and Mr Netanyahu over the last three years, I'd be careful if I were Netanyahu. After Mr Obama refused to allow his picture to be taken with Netanyahu during his first visit, leaving him to dine alone in the White House, and demanding that Israel return to the pre-1969 borders, if President Obama is behind him watching his back, Mr Netanyahu better look over his left and right shoulders to make sure he doesn't see Obama's hands resting there. Ya know what I'm sayin'?

Marriage No Business of Government

       

       So Maryland is now the eighth State to allow same-sex marriage. I know this will probably shock both my conservative and liberal friends but I don't think the government at any level should prohibit gay marriage. That being said, I don't think government should have anything to do with marriage at all. I have a difficult time finding any compelling reason why government has a stake in marriage whatsoever. Can someone explain it to me?

       Marriage isn't necessary to live together; homosexual behavior is not illegal or if it is in some States, those laws are no longer enforced; fornication laws are no longer enforced; adultery is no longer criminal behavior; marriage is no longer a requirement for having or raising children and marriage alone is not enough to guarantee things like inherence rights, so what is the purpose of marriage from a State's point of view? It certainly can't be to promote any moral standards because we have a secular government and morality is the purview of religion. I also see a logical dilemma that has now been introduced when marriage is no longer defined as between one man and one woman. Why is plural marriage not permitted? And what about marriage between adult close relatives? So my question remains, what stake does any State or the federal government have in marriage? It seems to me, none!

       We have a very sophisticated legal system in America where you can legally arrange any agreement you want: next of kin issues, legal guardianship, shared property rights, custody rights issues, inheritance rights, etc. So why is State or state involvement in marriage necessary at all? It seems to me that State laws regarding marriage are more about things like taxation rather than individual rights or promoting any sort of societal stability.

       The real irony in Maryland - a State that is facing profound fiscal problems - is that the day before same-sex marriage was passed by the State Senate, that same body failed to pass a State budget. So is the budget now the next item on the list of things to do for liberal Maryland legislators? No of course not! The next item on the liberal legislative docket is the death penalty. Unfortunately, like same-sex marriage, this isn't a high priority to Maryland voters either.