blah. it is lost... let me say it this way: there are certain things in life that i will never get to enjoy because i am not black or mexican. why? because ethnicity is a thing that is pretty well defined. my post was less about affirmitive action, and more about social definition. in this way it applies to the disscussion at hand. some people would look at gay marriage and say that they are no more entitled to marrige than i am entitled to attend grambling (a black university). there are other scholarships that i can get, theres one that i am eligible for in the uc system just because i had some relatives from some spacific provine in southern china. point being this: who decides that marriage is a thing that is so easily malable and negotiable, whereas things like who get access to what scholarships are set in stone, due to racial distinctions? why cant i be a mexican? why cant gay people get 'married' why why why? the problem is that there is so much dogma on both sides rooted in either christian teachings, or in the teachings of the religion or progressivism, that the root of the question gets lost. if there were distinctions like the one im my little story in question, rather than one bathed in such a social spotlight, the debate wouldnt even exist.
Mercy's eyes are blue
When she places them in front of you
Nothing holds a roman candle to
The solemn warmth you feel inside
