Ayn Rand supported marriage, but I think she meant one that was not controlled by government. I would gladly get a marriage if it became private and not government controlled. Also, if the religious would share the institution and it became a privatized business. In the mean time...me and my boyfriend are faithful and loving and we don't need the government's papers saying it.

I agree with your points. However, I find it interesting when a person needs to straddle so many definitions for oneself there can be none. Man or Woman. Then move forward. I question the sanity of this man/woman. I question the decision making of his lesbian lover who wants the divorce as well as his current lesbian (?) lover. They wish the spectacle and limelight and they are burdening our court system. They should have to either go away or pay all costs to continue their case.
As well, I seriously worry for their children in light of the spectacle they enjoy and continue making.
On the marriage thing. I am very supportive of my gay friends seeking civil union. But I'm big into definitions and marriage is already taken. Find another definition, that's all. I am against state sanctions. Divorce has turned into a circus in our court system. Even with pre-nups and how does one divide children like property? that boggles the mind.

Hm...I'm more concerned with the mother of the children (the transgender who used to be a man) and his philosophy. I am gay, and so in most states wouldn't be allowed to marry. I am atheist and so see not point in getting married anyways as I see marriage as more of a religious unity and simply just earning the government's approval (which, since I'm Objectivist, I see no need in government approval of my personal life). But, if I did want a marriage, I would not be allowed one. I would say to her, "you went through surgery, found a transgender man to be the father of your children, and managed to get a marriage. So what if the government won't say you two are transgendered? Why would you need their opinion? I didn't ask for their permission to be gay, and I sure wouldn't jeopardize it if I had the chance (though I do not wish to marry, as my boyfriend knows I love him and we are faithful to each other and keep each other for sexual pleasure and an emotion of happiness that we will always be able to count on each other for...we will never cheat for why should we when we can count on each other for comfort and sexual pleasure?)." That being said, in an Objectivist society, government wouldn't control personal life, and so this wouldn't even be an issue. That's just one of the many reasons I love Objectivism so much: it is the only philosophy that allows for truly a free private life not controlled by another person or group of people.

I listened to the whole thing. it did get the creepy version of alleged murderer singing O Holy Night so sweetly out of my head

I'm still listening. You?

haha

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JQXgn-cu...

I had to click on the part where she won a singing contest that sheriff joe held.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-5...

what did she do? I don't tune into stuff like that.
but for some reason these types of cases interest me. probably due to the testing law to its limits and watching how judges will warp reason in order to be inclusive

Ref. the Jody A. trial: I don't care why she did it, or anything of the details. What a waste. Whatever the reason take her out and put her down like a rabid dog. There is no doubt about guilt. She can't be trusted to walk the streets with others, and I feel no responsibility to provide for her in prison.

Absolutely!

if you could wrap your head around this case, it would be even weirder :)

I can't get my head wrapped around this case. Just too weird.

Yes...and get attention...as freak shows usually do. (Look at this Jody A trial...costing us MILLIONS) and people are glued to it.... she's a freak! And WE'RE paying for this display.

I didn't think about the bathroom angle. I am appalled that this could even be messing up our courts. They should have to pay for court costs and judges time. A rational gay individual would have understood divorce could not be granted to a gay couple with present AZ law. This is intended to push a state government to do something unconstitutional.

It's a freak show. It's okay to be a freak, if that's who you are...why the hell it needs to be on display is another issue. Having the babies wasn't getting it enough attention so it moved onto a divorce issue...BACK in the spotlight! It's almost genius....in a B.O. kind of way.

I think Dad/Mom is being very unaccepting of AZ's unacceptance of transgendered marriages. He/she is now legally allowed into public bathrooms (whichever gender restroom he/she prefers) in AZ however.

Bizarre!