The story by Karin Zeitvogel of a Washington, DC Episcopal Church paying for the wedding of two homeless people raises a number of questions.
First, I don't care how much they love each other, if these two cannot afford to care for themselves, should they really be getting married?
As my grandmother's sister use to say, "Love can fall in a bucket of sh--."
By this she meant that while important, love was not the sole determining factor upon which one should make critical life decisions especially when one is existing at a minimal subsistence level.
For even though no one wants to say it for fear of being branded a hatemonger and the like, since these two are of prime breeding age, who is going to pick up the tab when babies come along as that use to be what married people did even though nowadays it seems the stork can arrive at any time either before or after the wedding date without an eye being raised by the hypertolerant.
Neither of these people are employed. Why should the rest of us pick up their bills when they bring unnecessary expenses into their lives when they are already in a state of being unable or unwilling to provide for themselves?
Furthermore, as Rush Limbaugh use to say, liberalism is easy; it is conservatism that's hard.
Analyzing this story, one has to wonder if the wedding is not so much for the couple as it is to make the congregation providing it feel good.
For at the end of the day, while it might be more glamorous to throw a wedding, is it really what these two people need in their lives to make it better or to face its challenges?
by Frederick Meekins
