Posted on 11/08/2009 5:02:08 PM PST by rhema
"How would same-sex marriage hurt your marriage?" Advocates of changing our marriage laws tell us this is an unanswerable question.
A typical couple -- Mary and John, married for 15 years -- may find it tough to answer. That's because it's the wrong question. Mary and John won't stop loving each other or be bounced out of their house if same-sex marriage prevails. To get at what's really at stake, we need a different question: "How will same-sex marriage harm the institution of marriage -- and in the long run, all of us?"
Marriage is a universal human institution. Across the world and throughout history, it's been exclusively male-female. That's not because of antigay bigotry, but because marriage is anchored in a primal biological and social fact: Sex between men and women creates new human beings.
The primary purpose of marriage is to ensure the best environment for rearing the children born of male-female sexual acts. Marriage channels men's and women's sexual attraction into productive ends, and harnesses the male sex drive by binding men to the mothers of their children. The evidence is overwhelming: Boys and girls flourish best with a married mother and father, who perform different and complementary roles in preparing them to deal with the world and the opposite sex.
Same-sex marriage would not -- as advocates claim -- merely extend the benefits of marriage to more people. It would gut marriage of its fundamental meaning and transform it from an institution centered on children and the mother/father nuclear family to one centered on adults. Marriage would become an artificial institution, bestowing state approval on any adult relationship based on affection and interdependence.
Such a redefinition would compel us to repudiate time-honored ideas of social organization. Last year, in mandating gay marriage, the Iowa Supreme Court
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
Gay marriage won’t hurt the institution. Welfare has already accomplished that. Marriage was designed to assure a breadwinner supported *his* family. That he served as a role model to his sons was incidental.
Seems to me that both God and Mother Nature, for those afraid to go the God route, were pretty clear on how things are meant to be.
Excellent article.
Bravo! One of THE best articles I’ve seen on traditonal marriage! Time to share it with some sodomites over at the Seattle Times blogs.
It’s difficult to see how ANY society can hold up against cohesive societies that still value the traditional family. In Europe, the results are in - no more kids (to speak of).
By the way, the societies that still value traditional families include Muslims (as much as we would like otherwise) and Chinese...among others.
Welfare DID hurt the institution of marriage, but that fact does not negate this article.
Marriage is the foundation of society and ensures that the future generations are nurtured so that the civilization continues. It’s not about a breadwinner supporting the family, it’s about a mother and father nurturing and raising their children.
Thanks for posting this: well-written, sensible-— and the lady has courage.
bump
Defining Marriage Down . . .
is no way to save it.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/451noxve.asp
The homosexual lobby, like the racist-black lobby, are controlled by communist forces.
It was part of the original plank of Marx and Engel’s Communist Manifesto to destroy the family as part of his revolution to destroy Western civilization.
The unnatural and perverted impulses of the homosexuals makes the confront their own non-normative behavior every day. Thus, they are constantly seeking “validation.” The anti-establishment (pro-communist) forces took control of the homosexual lobby long ago, appealing to their need for validation, as part of their attack on the traditional, Judeo-Christian family.
I’ve Got Those Folsom Prison Wedding Bell Blues - (hilarious on absurdity of Canadian liberalism!)
So what happens if Prison Chaplains are also forced to perform same sex marriages?
...Does this mean newly wed inmates can automatically bunk together? What happens if the administration decides to reclassify and reassign one of them to a different institution? Imagine the flak when liberal media outlets get wind that prison transfer policies might break up Spike and Rocky’s happy home...
Supposing Bruno; the biggest, toughest, meanest SOB on the tier decides he’s going to marry each and every convict in his cellblock. He could control the drugs, contraband, gambling and all the other prison rackets with immunity. Why? Because no one in Canada can be forced to give evidence against their spouse.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1413989/posts
How would counterfiet money hurt your money?
Minneapolis Star Tribune No way not in that news paper? Good Article can not believe its in this paper.
Under what circumstances?
Cheers!
How would counterfiet money hurt your money?
Excellent retort. Thank you.
If someone wants their marriage to be sanctioned by their faith, their peers, and/or their family, then let them meet the criteria of those groups. They don't need my endorsement via the government's blessing. Only when it encroaches on me, usually during divorce, do I want the government to step in. And then only to arbitrate the dissolution of the fiscal aspects.
As long as We the People continue to want the State to be the Grand Being that can bestow the right to marry, then we have given away our right to apply whatever moral or philosophical requirements for marriage any subgroup may hold dear.
Don't fight gay marriage - fight government controlled marriage!
Welfare and no-fault divorce. But the cost of not having a "role model" is hardly incidental.
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes (Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol. 14, p. 403-26, 1978.)
75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes (Source: Rainbows for all God`s Children.)
70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Special Report, Sept 1988)
85% of all youths sitting in prisons grew up in a fatherless home (Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of Corrections 1992)
If people don't mind living in places like Detroit, then marriage doesn't matter.
I’m in shock too. That was my reaction. The (Red)Star Tribune???
I wonder if it really made it into the print edition.
Yeah, Minneapolis is pretty liberal, isn't it.
But just look at all the vile comments. The homo-perverts always attack the person, not the person's well-reasoned, obviously true arguments.
And in one fell swoop you knock true marriage down to the lowest common denominator of the homo-nazis. Nice.
No, marriage is what it is because of its very nature. Its unique essence cannot be transposed to another incongruent relationship by arbitrary edict. That the government recognizes and upholds this true nature of marriage against all other counterfeits isn't regulation. It's recognition of reality.
I’m surprised that the libertarians that want to do away with state sanctioned marriage didn’t throw in their two bits about legalizing drugs while the state is at it.
The state has always had a vested interest in promoting the nuclear family. As shown in “ALPAPilots” statistics, when the family falls apart, society pays for it.
The most important social function of traditional marriage is its implicit purpose of holding parents responsible for the upbringing of their children. There is a profound psychological connection between parents and their children. A father provides a role model for his sons, as does a mother for her daughters. Mothers protect and motivates her sons and the fathers do likewise for his daughters. The outcome of a child’s upbringing is most often a parent’s most profound source either of either joy or disappointment. It is parents who care about their children.
Government agencies, on the other hand, don’t give a damn about other peoples’ kids. Only a demented parent would subject their kids to the kind of social experimentation that goes in public schools. Nevertheless, those in government want to be the ones who shape childrens’ minds and values.
This is why government control freaks are not satisfied with “Civil Union” arrangements for gay partners. Granting inherently barren homosexual unions the same status as traditional marriages is just a device for trivializing the term “marriage” to the level of a financial legality.
Here’s actor John Barrowman on what it really means:
It’s been a long wait but we legitimised our relationship to each other a long time ago when we signed our mortgages together and this is just something that forces people who don’t want to recognise it that they have to.
No room for misquote there then. Yes, indeed. It was never about folks solemnly waiting for the State to endorse their lifestyles, it was always about using the power of Big Government to impose their lifestyle on third parties.
Don't forget the unfettered, open pornography. Libertarians love that. Oh, except for child porn - we can't have that, can we?
Once the homosexual movement and their libertarian “allies” get rid of “pesky” little laws like “age of consent”, child porn will be inconsequential. It’s all about sexual freedom, right?
They have expressed as much in many instances. This is surely their next level of "evolution" to attain, the next bulwark to break down. If only those traditional troglodytes would get out of the way. /sarc
Threads like this on the Herald web-site always get a few postings from Gay activists that herald the demise of the Greatest Generation because older people are the largest part of the population that stands in their way. Seniors vote. Ironically while they are giddy celebrating at the grave of the Senior population that stood in their way. They won’t notice the Islamic population behind them.
Yes, their language is chilling. But another group that stands in their way is Christians, both young and old. By this I mean genuine, Bible-believing Christians, who the left hates with demonic intensity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.