Gay Marriage

It is no surprise to see that Texas is not one of the 32 states that has legalized gay marriage. Now the question is... Should Texas legalize gay marriage or stay on the conservative course? I believe keeping marriage the traditional way would be best for society.

Ms. Vasquez finds great evidence in her blog Gay Marriage to prove that same-sex marriage is a civil right by using a statement from the supreme court in 1967 saying that marriage is "one of the basic civil rights of man." However 'sexual orientation' does not meet a criteria set by the Civil Rights act in 1964, where (1) a history of longstanding, widespread discrimination, (2) economic disadvantage, and (3) immutable characteristics. Therefore, the belief that same-sex marriage is a civil right can be misleading. 

The famous Mark Twain quotes are the best to get your mind thinking such as the quote used by Ms. Vasquez, "History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Although the purpose of the quote is to get the mind open to see events in a different way, I wouldn't think that the married man didn't intend the quote to be a reflection of gay marriage. 

I agree with Ms. Vasquez that kids aren't exposed to a different type of love other than their parent's love. I'm sure that Ms. Vasquez and I believe that kids grow up being nurtured, meaning that the environment is what affects children. Moreover, it is possible that in twenty years we could see young children being raised by same-sex parents, only if gay marriage is legalized in all 50 states. However, can same-sex parents raise the child the same as a traditional married couple? In my opinion, I think not. They will be raised differently, they will grow up seeing that male should find a male love or a female should find a female love. What about the exposure to traditional love? Having same-sex couples raise kids could increase some risk. There are reports from pro/con gay marriage stating that "girls who are raised apart from their fathers are reportedly at higher risk for sexual activity and teenage pregnancy." Legalizing gay marriage may be a law that demonstrates same-sex marriage is okay but it lacks many things that a traditional marriage provides and why put the future at risk when you can keep the way things are.

The United States isn't abusing gay people, this isn't the era of slavery. The world knows whats right from wrong and gay people should accept that. Sure, we can be more aware of abuse on bullying by calling gay people slang mocking terms but they aren't the only human beings getting mocked. Don't forget that there is racism, people live with being mocked every day by their color but they hold the anger in. Eventually being gay in society will be a custom in the United States, there won't be any major mistreatment but being given the privilege to marry same-sex can lead to some high risk. 

The blog was well written by Andrea with good obvious points to make you wonder why the gay marriage isn't legalized. I searched the web a little to show another side of the story and found reasons on why it shouldn't be legalized. 

Dram Shop Act

Becoming a server or a bartender is one of the most popular jobs you can find around Texas. Selling at a restaurant or bar is quick fast money. However, there are some consequences if the seller does not carefully follow certain guidelines. Prior on receiving the alcohol related job, sellers must complete a Texas Alcohol and Beverage Certificate (TABC) in order to show proof that they are aware of intoxicated customers and aware of minors illegally buying alcohol. Reasons why this certificate is so important in Texas is because selling alcohol to the wrong customer can result in a car accident. Of course the drunk driver will get filed for charges, however, they may not be the only ones charged. Furthermore, if the victim of the drunk driver wishes to sue the restaurant that served the drunk driver alcohol, then the employee who served the beverage to the drunk driver can suffer major consequences as well. Does the seller deserve the Dram Shop Act consequences? I don't think so.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that identifying minors or intoxicated customers may help to protect the road better. However, it takes a lot of small cues to identify an intoxicated person. Furthermore, if one of those small cues are missed by the seller, then he is at huge risk for himself once that intoxicated customer is on the road. The TABC shows you many techniques to identify an intoxicated person and they are very useful such as hearing customers slandering words, shouting, or seeing the inability to control their own body (TABC general questions). However, this is why I go against this policy. For example, the setting is a Halloween night, people are in costumes asking for drinks at the dance club's bar. The bar only has three bartenders working their best in order to serve drinks as fast as they can. At the time, the helpless bartenders probably can't recognize how many drinks has been served to each customer. Although, they do try their best. Later that evening, one of the people who drank at the club suffers a huge car accident. The victim of the car accident files charges and wants to point more fingers at the firm who sold the intoxicated person alcohol. Little does the victim know, the bartender had too much going on his mind to serve drinks throughout the night. Nevertheless, none of the justification supports the guilty bartender. He served an intoxicated customer unwillingly and can't get out of the situation. The bartender pays up to 500$ for fines and has his certificate removed. Therefore, he is unable to work as a bartender.

Let me establish first that there should be policies and laws to avoid situations of drunk driving. However, I believe it is not fair that sellers should take all responsibility for the drunk diver's mayhem. Accidents happen but don't point the fingers at the wrong helpless people.