My marriages failed because of ME.
Before I had ever heard of gay marriage.
I probably could have saved at least one of my marriages by doing a lot of things different; by putting forth a lot more effort and sacrifice. But what uninvolved "others" were doing couldn't have saved them. My marriages would have failed regardless of what relationships or marriages other people- most of whom I don't know and will never meet- choose to engage in.
So, to claim you are "defending marriage" without addressing the reason mine failed- probably the same reason the vast majority of marriages that fail do so- is silly.
No one else's relationship status can threaten my relationships, or weaken them in any way, unless I let them. And that would probably mean I am focusing on the wrong thing.
.
Those who want you to doubt that anarchy (self-ownership and individual responsibility) is the best, most moral, and ethical way to live among others are asking you to accept that theft, aggression, superstition, and slavery are better.
KentForLiberty pages
▼
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
You are being played
Arbitrarily changing rules to benefit yourself isn't right- especially when those new rules violate someone. Even my young daughter has figured that out (it hasn't stopped her from trying to get away with it, though).
She was complaining that one of her playmates changes the rules as she goes in order to make sure she wins. I pointed out that when someone does that it makes makes others not want to play their game.
As I said it I suddenly thought of The State.
"Theft is wrong, unless we do it and call it 'taxation'."
"Here, change your clocks so that you can be forced to get up early and feel sick for a month or so."
"Stop for at least 4 seconds at this red metal octagon or we get to steal money from you so that we can afford to keep stealing money from others who fail to stop 'good enough' at this and other red metal octagons."
"This gun was OK here last year, but today if you are caught with it we get to kidnap you and murder you if you resist."
Some rules were changed to benefit the bad guys centuries ago, and some will be changed tomorrow. It makes no difference when the change occurred if the new rules go against liberty, and benefit those who want you to believe you owe them allegiance. You know what the rules should be- anything more is going backwards.
And on and on it goes. Smart people know they are being played. How do they respond to that knowledge?
.
She was complaining that one of her playmates changes the rules as she goes in order to make sure she wins. I pointed out that when someone does that it makes makes others not want to play their game.
As I said it I suddenly thought of The State.
"Theft is wrong, unless we do it and call it 'taxation'."
"Here, change your clocks so that you can be forced to get up early and feel sick for a month or so."
"Stop for at least 4 seconds at this red metal octagon or we get to steal money from you so that we can afford to keep stealing money from others who fail to stop 'good enough' at this and other red metal octagons."
"This gun was OK here last year, but today if you are caught with it we get to kidnap you and murder you if you resist."
Some rules were changed to benefit the bad guys centuries ago, and some will be changed tomorrow. It makes no difference when the change occurred if the new rules go against liberty, and benefit those who want you to believe you owe them allegiance. You know what the rules should be- anything more is going backwards.
And on and on it goes. Smart people know they are being played. How do they respond to that knowledge?
.