It appears that Martin and Ted agree with the intent of recent campaigns in establishing that:

1. Marriage is completely, entirely, and exclusively all about sex.

2. Only Martin and Ted are qualified to determine what constitutes permissible sex.

3. Since "everybody" agrees with Martin and Ted, the rest of us must not be included in "everybody" i.e. we don't matter if we disagree so it's okay to pass laws to make us do as they say.

4. There is a statutory requirement that Martin has to attend gay pride demonstrations.

Martin definitely holds an advantage over me, as he at least implied that in his schools kids are now taught how to have sex. We didn't get that when I was young, so I had to figure out some of it on my own. Maybe that's where he got his understanding that:

5. It has to be illegal to form a civil contract unless someone gets fucked.

I thought this latter one was just a tradition in Law and Advertising schools, but apparently - to Martin - it has more general applicability. I'll definitely have to look into that.

I'm a little disturbed by the contention that the only purpose of marriage is to have children, since I know several "childless" marriages. I guess I'll need to tell them that their relationship is illegal now. Maybe they just didn't have children because they didn't get that "how to have sex" training as kids. Martin will have to tell us whether he'll allow them to be retrained and taught to fuck right (Martin's way).

I am still a little confused though. I thought that marriage was about forming a relationship in which people share an entire life and lifestyle, and all Martin seems to be able to think about is having sex. And he's never mentioned whether he does it - he's only interested in how others do it....(?). Maybe he didn't pay attention in that class.

Stay with me. I'll figure this out eventually.

John