I hate FaceBook.
One particular current joy I have is people promoting their pet issues. Pro-this, anti-that, if you don't agree, you are anti-ME, you hater.
Did I say I hated FaceBook?
I am particularly weary of people whose claim to fame is doing voices for foreign cartoons dubbed into English, seizing this fame as a soapbox to tell me I am evil because I do not support their cause. I am a hater because I do not support government-supported this or that. Not merely me, but people of similar thought are haters.
They do not understand, at least my point of view. I do not want ANY government intrusion on business, relationships, life in general. If the government GRANTS a right, it can REVOKE that right.
Marriage? Do you realise state marriage licensing was to prevent racial intermarriage? The excuse was "health". Why do you want the government in your life at all, much less using it to bludgeon people into accepting you, or me? The next regime may not be "you" friendly? Do you still want government to have the power?
A year ago, or so, there was an io9 post about the Internet Kill Switch. One guy was inclined to like it:
"So maybe I am alone on this but wouldn't a kill switch be a good idea in the event of a massive internet offensive?" --w****r
I had to respond:
"Those who trade internet freedom for internet security deserve neither internet nor freedom." -- Cyborg Ben Franklin
Seriously, placing a kill switch in the hands of any one man (or party) is a recipe for major trouble. Ask yourself: "Would I want a President of The Other Party to have this power?"
The lesson holds for every issue where we want the Government- Fed, State, and local- to help us get Our Way.
Here is a bit of info:
The American colonies officially required marriages to be registered, but until the mid-19th century, state supreme courts routinely ruled that public cohabitation was sufficient evidence of a valid marriage. By the later part of that century, however, the United States began to nullify common-law marriages and exert more control over who was allowed to marry.
By the 1920s, 38 states prohibited whites from marrying blacks, “mulattos,” Japanese, Chinese, Indians, “Mongolians,” “Malays” or Filipinos. Twelve states would not issue a marriage license if one partner was a drunk, an addict or a “mental defect.” Eighteen states set barriers to remarriage after divorce.
In the mid-20th century, governments began to get out of the business of deciding which couples were “fit” to marry. Courts invalidated laws against interracial marriage, struck down other barriers and even extended marriage rights to prisoners.--STEPHANIE COONTZ