Marriage and the USDA

5/22/2012

Marriage and the USDA

I’ve been contemplating the logical outcome of a successful passage of the definition of marriage amendment this fall in Minnesota.

Having heard Maggie Gallagher first hand and read over and over the other proponents’ arguments that this legal construct, marriage, should be limited to a breeding pair of opposite gender humans I want to begin now advocating for a new regulation.

Immediately after passage we need to have our congressional delegates, Democrat and Republican alike, introduce bills to regulate this legal construct further at the national level.

Given the breeding pair premise for marriage it seems that animal husbandry practices developed in the agrarian sector should be used as a template.

So let’s regulate marriage even further and place it under the United States Department of Agriculture. This is one sure way to see that no one tries to marry a goat which seems to be one concern of the proponents. Beyond that think of what can be avoided. We know the USDA is containing the mad cow threat; in a like fashion they could be counted on to contain other conditions that may be the outcome of an unsuitable breeding pair of humans.

When the genome is sufficiently researched we can anticipate precluding the left handed who always need that end of the table slot and all other kind of inconvenient human content where we find it.

And I know what you’re probably thinking, we can eliminate the homosexuals but actually we won’t screen for that gene because we already have the assurance from the likes of Gallagher that this is a choice and/or the outcome of poor parenting. We can save money on this and avoid a witch hunt for what we are told doesn't exist.

Turning this over to the USDA will also create some jobs, the high paying technical type, so we can count chromosomes, run DNA stains and keep the gene pool towards the preferable deeper end. I’m sure the science of animal husbandry industry has a leg up on where the best jobs will be.

Give it some thought, because the shallower end of the current willy-nilly gene pool may just get this amendment passed. If it weren’t for the Australian ballot we’d have a list for the DNA stains to start the culling. But if PhotoID passes we are that much closer to linking a ballot to an individual. It will come eventually.

As I contemplate it even further I think we could eliminate that most vile condition of mankind, a sense of humor.

Win! Win! Don’t you think, or don’t you?