I was reading the Idaho Statesman, where columnist Dan Popkey was writing about an effort in Idaho to enact an anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment. Popkey wrote that Jeff Esters, Pastor at Fellowship Babtist Church, said that failure to approve the amendment could lead to men marrying dogs, or television sets. Now there's a leader who thinks outside the box.
The idea of marrying a dog is pretty far-fetched. After all, a dog is already man's best friend, so what would be the point. Plus, the thought of a dog wearing lipstick gives me the willies.
Now, marrying a TV is a different thing altogether. Imagine. The TV is never too tired to turn on. The TV never asks you to carry out the garbage, or nags you to fix the dripping faucet. If the channel you're watching is boring or depressing you can change it. You are in control of it's moods, not hormones. And, of course, the best part; the mute button on the remote control.
Jeez, what a slippery slope. We fail to pass an anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment, and soon guys are marrying TVs. What's next, guys marrying 12-packs of beer? You know what would happen then. The guy would get down to his last beer and say "Honey, I'm leaving you. I've found another 12-pack, one with a full set of cans."
Still, Pastor Esters might be on to something. What I'm confused about is, if he thinks that defeating the amendment will lead to men marrying TV's, why is he against it? He must not have a TV.
Wednesday, March 08, 2006
From MREater dated January 30, 2005: