Monday, December 28, 2009

"Homoculturalism" infringes the Marriage Trademark

Giving homosexual bigots a badly needed political victory after a string of voter-led rejections in California, Maine, New York and New Jersey, the Washington D.C. City Council recently legalized gay “marriage” within its boundaries. What’s wrong with that you ask? Simple. Trademark infringement.

A trademark is a unique, recognizable name brand or turn of phrase used to sell a particular product. “Coca Cola” is one such famous trademark. Federal law protects the owner’s rights in the exclusive use of the brand indefinitely. The use of the brand is infringed if another company sells something using that brand without permission causing confusion among potential buyers.

Over the last thirty years, the activist “homoculturalist” (my term) agenda is one of demoralizing mainstream heterosexual culture by undermining traditional moral and cultural restraints on sexual behavior. The successful campaign has emboldened all forms of sexual displays – from public kissing to shacking up, from soft porn to S&M bondage, from cross dressing to gender mutations all in the name of “freedom from repression.” And yet they are not satisfied. We the People are not tolerant enough.

Homoculturalists now demand that the word “marriage” also apply to their brand of homosexual relationships. Except that the word is already defined. The marriage brand is already internationally known and well recognized as between a man and a woman.

The voters’ successful passage of Prop 8 in California defined “marriage” simply as between one man and one woman. That was all it said. In fact, Prop 8 didn’t do anything to the rights of gays or lesbians. It formally defined the social trademark called “marriage” as a heterosexual entity – a truth that everyone from the dawn of time commonly understood. Prop 8 therefore eliminated trademark confusion – there is no such thing as “gay marriage.”

And that makes homosexuals really irate. Their reaction to marriage is akin to Petrucchio’s demand of Kate in Shakespeare’s politically incorrect comedy “The Taming of the Shrew.” Radical homoculturalists insist that society figuratively say the sky is green in order to prove tolerance.

Homosexuals are free to enter into a similar union but they shouldn’t try to confuse society by usurping the “marriage” trademark. Do not redefine a word that already has a concrete meaning just because you want to. You are welcome to coin a new phrase – like “homoculturalist” -- just leave our word “marriage” alone. A little tolerance if you please.

Susan in Glendale

No comments:

Post a Comment