Posted on 02/05/2013 5:29:33 PM PST by fractionated
The House of Commons voted overwhelmingly on Tuesday to approve a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in Britain, indicating that the bill is assured of passage as it moves through further legislative stages....
After a six-hour debate, the Commons vote was 400 to 175 for the bill. It will have to pass in the House of Lords, where delaying tactics by opponents are possible, but Mr. Cameron has said that he plans to have the bill enacted into law sometime this summer.....
A day after the newly confirmed archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, took office saying that he shared the Church of England’s opposition to same-sex marriage, three cabinet officials said in a letter published in The Daily Telegraph that the new legislation was “the right thing to do at the right time.”
“Marriage has evolved over time,” the letter said. “We believe that opening it up to same-sex couples will strengthen, not weaken, the institution.”
The three ministers — George Osborne, the chancellor of the Exchequer, Foreign Secretary William Hague and Home Secretary Theresa May — also asked whether it was “any longer acceptable to exclude people from marriage simply because they love someone of the same sex.”
Ed Miliband, the leader of the opposition Labour Party, had said on Monday that he would urge his 255 legislators in the 649-member body to vote with him.
“I’ll be voting for equal marriage for a very simple reason: I don’t think that the person you love should determine the rights you have,” he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Its good to know that while the muslims take over their once great nation the government of Britain is taking care of the really important issues.
No, not really. We're just doing what the people in Sodom did. Nothing new under the sun.
“Now, since the family and human society at large spring from marriage, these men will on no account allow matrimony to be the subject of the jurisdiction of the Church. Nay, they endeavor to deprive it of all holiness, and so bring it within the contracted sphere of those rights which, having been instituted by man, are ruled and administered by the civil jurisprudence of the community. Wherefore it necessarily follows that they attribute all power over marriage to civil rulers, and allow none whatever to the Church; and, when the Church exercises any such power, they think that she acts either by favor of the civil authority or to its injury. Now is the time, they say, for the heads of the State to vindicate their rights unflinchingly, and to do their best to settle all that relates to marriage according as to them seems good.”
Pope Leo XIII, 1880
Freegards
Britain goes libertarian, next is polygamy.
>> “We believe that opening it up to same-sex couples will strengthen, not weaken, the institution.”
Beliefs shaped by political inevitability. #ing asshats.
Should say in the process of enacting law...
And there's no need for the government to be involved in it at all. In fact, it would be irrational for the government to BE involved: there's no public interest. And there truly isn't, if it's a private relation: an adult social unit in which adults are negotiating or contracting for their own self-interest.
But if the definition of marriage is "the union of a man and a woman with each other, and any children who come from their union, then sure, gay couples can marry: if the couple consists of a gay man and a lesbian! Because this is the only kind of "gay couple" which could actually have children come from their union.
The fatal fact is that a good many heterosexuals have already "changed the definition of marriage," essentially excluding children from their idea of what it IS. In other words, they have already radically shrunk marriage to an arrangement that centers on adult desires.
In that case, gays aren't really breaking up marriage. That's already largely accomplished. Nonmarital cohabitation did that. Contraception did that. Easy divorce did that. Fifty million abortions did that. Gays are just looking at the shapeless, broken heap of disjointed pieces of the-thing-that-used-to-be-called-marriage, and saying, "Oh, look, there's a piece I like. You're mean if you don't let me have it."
Who gives a crap? Britain’s going “to Hell in a handbasket” as the expression goes. Just another example of what a joke the “conservative” party there has begun.
Props to those who voted no, however. That’s a real statement in modern Britain.
(And to the person who said they’re going ‘libertarian’, gay marriage is part of the libertarian platform, but to label Britain as libertarian is grossly inaccurate. As with Obama, this is just classic ‘progressivism’, which can be very simply defined as statism with perks for interest groups to keep the ruling party in favor with their coalition. Just mimic the zeitgeist and tear down all those who challenge. That’s the progressive motto.)
‘Its good to know that while the muslims take over their once great nation’
Do Americans really believe that rubbish?.
>> And there’s no need for the government to be involved in it at all.
Agreed. But its involvement exceeds necessity, and is in reality insidious — it inevitably persecutes those that do not conform, support, nor service the beneficiaries.
Britain enacted part of the libertarian agenda, homosexual marriage, libertarians also support polygamy.
heh, Libertarians believe the state should enforce their own beliefs. Odd that. Next up - confiscation of Church property from those who refuse to submit.
They say they're for diversity, when actually what they want is One. Hundred. Percent. Conformity.
I'm that person, who you could have pinged, I didn't say the Britain is libertarian, but like America, it is becoming more libertarian, and homosexual marriage is part of that, as is polygamy.
Not living there I only know what I read in your newspapers, obviously. Why don’t you tell us?
Way to go England. You’re more irrelevant than ever now.
And from a Tory government. What a frickin’ shame.
equal marriage hey, see my tagline
Then all sorts of marriage shoudl apply if they think equality and the feces anal sex lovers will support it, ARF.
I could not care if I was the last one on this world who defends normal marriage, I will never shut up and never support their sick perverted disgusting feces marriage
I refuse to call them gay, gay means happy, they are homosexuals and I refuse to play their name games and put a happy word on their sick anal feces sex.
If our side had some guts then the left would not have destroyed families as much but alas the cowards on our side who refuse to speak up to neighbors, friends, family, on TV etc are just as much to blame
It seems to me the institution and society can benefit with the state’s involvement, or they can be harmed.
Either way, how does one keep many from being conditioned that the state defines marriage in the first place? To the state, marriage is whatever judges, pols, or the voting majority thinks it is. If it recognizes the instititution, it needs a definition, and how else does it come up with one, at least in the modern era? I mean I think that’s why so many have accepted ‘gay marriage’, it was possible for the state to approve it, so it must be possible.
On the good side, you make a good point about the children, in my opinion. The other side would say ‘but old folks get marrried and there is adoption and surrogates or whatever.’ Which I think isn’t a very good argument considering that if the state did what it was supposed to do many would benefit, the fringe cases don’t impede that. In a perfect world.
On the bad side, if the state is involved, how do you stop from being punished when you disagree with whatever impossibility the state is calling marriage at the time? They need a way to punish those who will never buy into it, and the state is that stick. That’s why supporting ‘gay marriage’ is so stupid for the big party libertarians: statists and homosexualists punishing those who will never agree with them as concerns marriage with the power of the state is what the ‘gay marriage’ debate is all about, something they say they are against generally.
Freegards
Pedophiles are next on that slippery slope
If America is becoming more libertarian, shouldn’t we see a movement towards more limited government? Or are you just grinding your funny little axe again?
pedo’s are next
moral decay is NOT evolution
There is absolutely no argument against the fact that America is becoming more libertarian, some parts of the libertarian agenda are easier to attain than other parts, unfortunately, the easier parts, those that they share with their leftist brothers, are the easiest to attain, and they make conservative economics impossible, that is the lie behind libertarianism.
Look at libertarians desire for totally open borders and banning the Border patrol and the INS, they argue that if you end all the social programs, then their open borders agenda makes total sense.
Which half of the libertarian immigration agenda is most likely to succeed, and which half will NEVER happen?
Rinse and repeat for homosexualizing the military and gay marriage, polygamy, even more abortion “rights”, even more of the homosexual agenda, even elimination or lowering of consent laws. etc. etc. etc.
Sure, libertarians are on the front lines, defending pedophilia.
It seems the statists equate small govt with pedophilia, homosexuality, polygamy, etc. etc. etc.
The reality is that libertarianism has an agenda, and that agenda has advanced incredibly over the last 50 years.
Libertarians are an incredibly dishonest bunch and will lie about most of what they stand for and fight for, and believe in, in an effort to always shape their cultish arguments for whichever audience they are speaking to.
Here is the leftists agenda hidden behind the Libertarian Party curtain.
Libertarian Party Platform:
Throw open the borders completely; only a rare individual (terrorist, disease carrier etc.) can be kept from freedom of movement through “political boundaries”.
Homosexuals; total freedom in the military, gay marriage, adoption, child custody and everything else.
Abortion; zero restrictions or impediments.
Pornography; no restraint, no restrictions.
Drugs; Meth, Heroin, Crack, and anything new that science can come up with, zero restrictions.
Advertising those drugs, prostitution, and pornography; zero restrictions.
Military Strength; minimal capabilities.
Yes. They certainly will be.
Too sadly true.
True libertarians support pedophilia, but they would change the name and just call it liberty, and explain that the people who created the nation were for it.
“Libertarian purists, however, don’t plan to be locked in the attic like a crazy aunt. Case in point: last month’s child-porn-gate.
The fracas started with Mary J. Ruwart, the candidate with perhaps the deepest, purest libertarian roots (her rejection of government is so complete that some party moderates have begun warning of the anarchical dangers of “Ruwarchy”). In April, a rival called her out for her thoughts in a 1999 book called Short Answers to the Tough Questions. “Children who willingly participate in sexual acts have the right to make that decision as well, even if it’s distasteful to us personally,” Ruwart wrote. “When we outlaw child pornography, the prices paid for child performers rise, increasing the incentives for parents to use children against their will.”
Ruwart’s is a classic libertarian take — a defense of free will (even for “child performers”) and an attack on government prohibitions of any kind. It’s also political poison. As libertarian blogger Steve Newton put it, Ruwart and her allies run the risk of turning the party into “the poster child for NAMBLA and the aluminum hat brigade.”
The party’s executive director, Shane Cory, saw the danger as well, and rushed out a press release titled, “Libertarians call for increased communication to combat child pornography.” Cory was attacked by hardliners who saw the release as an endorsement of increased federal prosecuting power. The party refused to vote on a resolution asking states to strongly enforce existing child porn laws. Cory resigned in protest, depriving a party in the midst of what may be its most promising election season of one of its most able organizers and fund raisers. But for many libertarian faithful, adherence to the most rigid of principles always trumps practical considerations about how those principles might be more broadly observed.”
bump
Even a forum I was a part of was full of liberturdians wanting it to be “decriminalized”.
But its happening, slowly, because of the media, Hollyweird and government schools.
No longer ‘Great’ is Britain.
Libertarians do not reject conservatism because we disagree about economics.
Your assertions about ‘True libertarians’ are irresponsible, reckless, and defamatory.
I reject libertarianism because it is utopian and unrealistic
Get real, huge swaths of the libertarian agenda has come to be, I never said anything about all of it.
All of it CAN’T pass, because it is childish, contradictory nonsense, open borders, drugs, the homosexual agenda, porn and the collapse of society brings in and creates MORE anti-conservative voters, not fewer, so conservatism loses ground while the hard left portions of libertarianism advance like a raging river.
I’m not cherry picking anything, I am pointing out where libertarians succeed.
Maybe, but it’s not the enemy.
Of course you’re cherrypicking. You dishonestly ignore the huge part of libertarianism centers on limiting the power of government and dismantling the welfare state, because you’ve got some kind of axe to grind.
True libertarians embrace libertarianism.
“Libertarian purists, however, don’t plan to be locked in the attic like a crazy aunt. Case in point: last month’s child-porn-gate”
“The fracas started with Mary J. Ruwart, the candidate with perhaps the deepest, purest libertarian roots”
“Ruwart’s is a classic libertarian take — a defense of free will (even for “child performers”) and an attack on government prohibitions of any kind.”
“The party’s executive director, Shane Cory, saw the danger as well, and rushed out a press release titled, “Libertarians call for increased communication to combat child pornography.” Cory was attacked by hardliners who saw the release as an endorsement of increased federal prosecuting power. The party refused to vote on a resolution asking states to strongly enforce existing child porn laws.”
Conservatives fight big government and for dismantling the welfare state, it is what they are known for, libertarians don’t reject conservatism over those issues, they reject conservatism over the issues that I keep revealing, and which the libs have made such incredible gains for 50 years.
Homosexuality, drugs, abortion, gay marriage, porn, open borders, etc.
The formal text of the Libertarian Party Platform on immigration. I think it says it all, do you see the end of welfare, smaller government, a reduction of social programs, the end of the democrat party in this immigration agenda?
COMPLETE PLATFORM TEXT
INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND CIVIL ORDER
IMMIGRATION:
“”The Issue: We welcome all refugees to our country and condemn the efforts of U.S. officials to create a new “Berlin Wall” which would keep them captive. We condemn the U.S. government’s policy of barring those refugees from our country and preventing Americans from assisting their passage to help them escape tyranny or improve their economic prospects.
The Principle: We hold that human rights should not be denied or abridged on the basis of nationality. Undocumented non-citizens should not be denied the fundamental freedom to labor and to move about unmolested. Furthermore, immigration must not be restricted for reasons of race, religion, political creed, age or sexual preference. We oppose government welfare and resettlement payments to non-citizens just as we oppose government welfare payments to all other persons.
Solutions: We condemn massive roundups of Hispanic Americans and others by the federal government in its hunt for individuals not possessing required government documents. We strongly oppose all measures that punish employers who hire undocumented workers. Such measures repress free enterprise, harass workers, and systematically discourage employers from hiring Hispanics.
Transitional Action: We call for the elimination of all restrictions on immigration, the abolition of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol, and a declaration of full amnesty for all people who have entered the country illegally.””
If you are conservative, libertarians are the enemy, if you are a leftist, then they are your ally.
They will gladly open our borders to a world of democrat voters and let them have their dope, abortions, and gay marriage, and pedophilia, as long as you let them fantasize about it somehow resulting in voters who want to give themselves fewer goodies and who suddenly put down the crack pipe and vote like right wing conservatives on economic issues.
yes it is the enemy of civilization
Yeah, exactly. They agree with conservatives on those issues. And those issues aren't just small things. They are at the center of what libertarianism is about. Which makes it pretty obvious that libertarians aren't liberals.
do you see the end of welfare, smaller government, a reduction of social programs, the end of the democrat party in this immigration agenda?
Of course not. You have to look at the part of the platform where those issues are actually covered. For instance in the section on healthcare:
We favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want (if any), the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions. People should be free to purchase health insurance across state lines.
Or the income tax:
All persons are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor. We call for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the U.S. Constitution. We oppose any legal requirements forcing employers to serve as tax collectors. Government should not incur debt, which burdens future generations without their consent. We support the passage of a "Balanced Budget Amendment" to the U.S. Constitution, provided that the budget is balanced exclusively by cutting expenditures, and not by raising taxes.
Or entitlements:
Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. Libertarians would phase out the current government-sponsored Social Security system and transition to a private voluntary system. The proper and most effective source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals. We believe members of society will become more charitable and civil society will be strengthened as government reduces its activity in this realm.Or firearms:
The only legitimate use of force is in defense of individual rights — life, liberty, and justly acquired property — against aggression. This right inheres in the individual, who may agree to be aided by any other individual or group. We affirm the individual right recognized by the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms, and oppose the prosecution of individuals for exercising their rights of self-defense. We oppose all laws at any level of government requiring registration of, or restricting, the ownership, manufacture, or transfer or sale of firearms or ammunition.Or the redistribution of wealth:
Libertarians want all members of society to have abundant opportunities to achieve economic success. A free and competitive market allocates resources in the most efficient manner. Each person has the right to offer goods and services to others on the free market. The only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All efforts by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society.Read it and weep, Mr. Cherrypicker.
Total BS.
And you’re a nutty one too.
What do you expect them to do -- honestly defend their love of Big Brother?
Totally true, conservatives are against abortion, gay marriage, homosexualizing the military, open borders, closing border controls and the INS, homosexual adoption, polygamy and pedophilia openly advertising heroin and porn, and so many of the other things that libertarians were formed to promote and fight for.
If you are conservative, libertarians are the enemy, if you are a leftist, then they are your ally.
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.