Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

If Same-sex Marriage Is a 'Right,' There Are No Rights
Townhall.com ^ | March 27, 2013 | Terry Jeffrey

Posted on 03/27/2013 6:14:19 PM PDT by Kaslin

The old adage that one lie leads to another is never more apparent than when modern American public officials deal with issues arising from sexual immorality.

President Bill Clinton, for example, started a chain of lies when he decided to have an adulterous relationship with a White House intern.

Clinton first lied to his wife, then to a federal court, then to the American people.

Nor could Clinton's lies, delivered as president, be his lies alone. His partisans in Congress either had to abandon him or add another link to the chain of lies by declaring that perjury and obstruction of justice in a federal court, so long as they were intended to cover up presidential adultery with a White House intern, were not the sort of high crimes and misdemeanors that ought to be considered impeachable offenses under the Constitution of the United States.

Yet, as corrosive as Clinton's perjury was to the public understanding of right and wrong and true liberty, it was not as corrosive as the left's current crusade to get the Supreme Court to declare same-sex marriage a "right."

Clinton's perjury was at least predicated on the assumption that people not only would see his behavior with a White House intern as a transgression against marriage, but also that they ought to do so.

If they are to succeed in their cause, those who now claim that same-sex marriage is a "right" must eradicate from American law and society the true -- and only sustainable -- rationale for any right at all.

That, of course, is that rights are immutable things that come from God -- that they are part of the natural moral law that all men and all nations have an inescapable duty to obey.

The Founding Fathers of this nation not only believed in the natural law created by God, but insisted it was the justification for the United States becoming a nation.

The "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them," they said, "to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station" of an independent state.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident," they said, "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Now, did Nature's God, who endowed all men with unalienable rights, endow two people of the same sex with a "right" to marry one another? If so, why did God create men and women?

Why did He create a system of human reproduction that rests on mothers and fathers and not mothers and mothers or fathers and fathers?

In truth, the advocates arguing to the Supreme Court that five or more justices should band together and declare a "right" to same-sex marriage are not arguing that there is a God-given right to such a thing. Indeed, the more candid among them see morality itself as an obstacle to their desired end.

In the case challenging the constitutionality of California's marriage amendment, which came before the Supreme Court on Tuesday, U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli argued in the Obama administration's amicus brief that it is illegitimate for the government to base a policy on "a moral judgment" -- in this case, a moral judgment about homosexual behavior.

"Protecting children from being taught about same-sex marriage is not a permissible interest insofar as it rests on a moral judgment about gay and lesbian ... intimate relationships," he says.

But it is going to be either one way or the other: The government either will teach children about same-sex "intimate relationships" or it will not. And if the government does teach children about same-sex "intimate relationships," it will either teach them that these relationships are right or they are wrong.

The advocates of same-sex marriage want the government to teach children that same-sex "intimate relationships" are not only right, but a "right."

To do that, they must reject the natural law, the Old Testament, the New Testament and more than 2,000 years of Western tradition. They must teach that the God of Genesis, who created all things, was wrong about marriage. They must teach that Jesus Christ was wrong about marriage.

And they must teach that the Declaration of Independence was wrong when it insisted our rights come from our Creator.

So, if God did not give Americans a right to same-sex marriage, who did? Its advocates are hoping it will be Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and ...

A state that no longer recognizes that it is subservient to the Laws of Nature and Nature's God will also no longer recognize the God-given rights of individuals. In such a state, there will only be those privileges the powerful decide to grant us -- until they decide to take them away.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: foundingfathers; gayrights; homosexualagenda; marriage; naturallaw; rights; samesexmarriage; supremecourt

1 posted on 03/27/2013 6:14:19 PM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
So, if God did not give Americans a right to same-sex marriage, who did? Its advocates are hoping it will be Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and ... the rest of that black robed Coven will...
2 posted on 03/27/2013 6:18:15 PM PDT by bigheadfred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

This entire “debate” about same sex marriage in the US Senate and the Supreme Court of the US is a mockery of the founding principles. Just another step by the Marxists towards total destruction of America.


3 posted on 03/27/2013 6:19:25 PM PDT by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigheadfred

Black-robed Coven———great descriptions of those evil, ugly Marxist people.


4 posted on 03/27/2013 6:21:54 PM PDT by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Yet, as corrosive as Clinton's perjury was to the public understanding of right and wrong and true liberty, it was not as corrosive as the left's current crusade to get the Supreme Court to declare same-sex marriage a "right."

They are declaring that "SODOMY" still a crime is many states and a crime against nature is OK by them. One of these days God is really gonna get pi$$ed!

5 posted on 03/27/2013 6:25:41 PM PDT by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Christianity certainly condemns same-sex marriage like it condemns all sin. However, one doesn’t have to rely on religious arguments to point out that only a man and woman can engage in sexual intercourse. Homosexuals cannot even consummate a marriage. It’s simply not physically possible. The anus is not a vagina, and that applies to heterosexual sodomy as well as the homosexual variety. Homosexuals do not engage in intercourse. They participate in mutual masturbation.


6 posted on 03/27/2013 6:25:44 PM PDT by CitizenUSA (Why celebrate evil? Evil is easy. Good is the goal worth striving for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Yes-—if they get Homosexual “marriage” to be “Just Law”——there is no such thing as “Justice” in America anymore. Justice is a Virtue and sodomy is a Vice.

That is how Marxists work-—they destroy the meaning of words so they can control the perceptions.

They are flipping Good and Evil-—and it is for the conditioning and brainwashing of little children so they will believe Up is Down and any stupid thing Marxists tell them-—good little ACORN zombies who follow orders—because they will not be able to use Reason.

Reason will be non-existent in America if such absurd “Rights” gets codified.


7 posted on 03/27/2013 6:28:02 PM PDT by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

If this breaks bad, you can 100% expect that polygamists and polyandeists will be running to the courthouse to file for the same “rights.” Because marriage has no meaning at all, other than “love.” And incest is automatically OK, since there can be no logical reason to preclude it.

There is no role for a Father and Mother, just folk.


8 posted on 03/27/2013 6:28:41 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Establishment Republicans don't like that totalitarian thing unless it is THEIR totalitarian thing!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
That is such a great post, Jim.

Just cannot believe the court is doing this. We are being ridiculed at these hearings as as country has been taken over by these Marxists. This perversion is not normal, and no amount of legislation will make it so. Tolerance and acceptance are two entirely different things. They can do what they like in their own lives and homes.

9 posted on 03/27/2013 6:29:45 PM PDT by Christie at the beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CitizenUSA

I should add that marriage simply acknowledges the physical reality of things. It wasn’t thought up as a means to deny homosexuals their rights. We cannot even refer to what the homosexuals want without calling it “same-sex” marriage, because the term “marriage” itself means husband and wife, male and female—not two incompatible members of the same sex who cannot procreate or even engage in true sexual union.

Personal preference doesn’t even come into this. People can have all sorts of sexual preferences that aren’t protected by law.


10 posted on 03/27/2013 6:32:40 PM PDT by CitizenUSA (Why celebrate evil? Evil is easy. Good is the goal worth striving for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Another great article on this. It’s absolutely correct. Seeing a right to marry someone of the same gender is a rejection of the ‘rights come from God’ principle. Our rights officially will come from government and the judiciary.


11 posted on 03/27/2013 6:34:25 PM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

I actually should have quoted that or at least paraphrased it. It is a description I heard on a John Hagee show years ago. It fits. I go with it.


12 posted on 03/27/2013 6:39:04 PM PDT by bigheadfred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon
That is what I have telling my dear hubby.

I thought we were all born with our rights from God.

13 posted on 03/27/2013 6:40:44 PM PDT by Christie at the beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

This whole things smells of the end of the Roman Empire.


14 posted on 03/27/2013 6:42:38 PM PDT by IrishPennant (All warfare is based on deception.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IrishPennant
This whole things smells of the end of the Roman Empire.

Honest question: When gay marriage is legal in the US in all 50 states - which will certainly be the case before I die (I'm 40) - what then? Will it become like abortion in that we'll protest and fight the good fight year after year?

I've been thinking about this a lot.
15 posted on 03/27/2013 6:48:46 PM PDT by whattajoke (Let's keep Conservatism real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
Heck, I remember being saddened when I found out marriages could take place in front of a Justice of the Peace and not just in a church. Thankfully I know there is only ONE who defines the union between and man and a woman...and he did it in the Garden.

These athesists will have their way with public definitions, but we know what a marriage is...as does He. We all have to answer!

16 posted on 03/27/2013 6:55:04 PM PDT by IrishPennant (All warfare is based on deception.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

so what next? will the left demand the right for liberals to marry their pets or lawn trees?


17 posted on 03/27/2013 6:57:21 PM PDT by Seventh_Tiger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
Best thing to do, is to not give up..We keep losing good people because they feel no reason to fight on and they give in. We have an uphill struggle since there are no opposition voices that can move things to a new direction. Most who represent us upfront should be in the back following. We have to hit back hard and get behind one true patriot. The anger needs to move into action of a movement.
18 posted on 03/27/2013 6:58:48 PM PDT by Christie at the beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Christie at the beach

I’ll fight. Dunno whether anyone will fight with me.


19 posted on 03/27/2013 7:14:19 PM PDT by JCBreckenridge (Texas is a state of mind - Steinbeck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
 photo 581118_441933335836194_1689542077_n.jpg
20 posted on 03/27/2013 7:15:33 PM PDT by SkyDancer (Live your life in such a way that the Westboro church will want to picket your funeral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

God has rights as well, and the means to enforce them.

America faces a choice which Canada already failed on, that being, to honour God or to poke a stick in God’s eye.

That may sound harsh, but wait until you see what comes with same sex marriage. Up here, we have laws that would make what I’m saying here prime grounds for a “hate speech” lawsuit. I think I could win on references to constitutional protections (that are worded much differently from the First Amendment) but I would still face an expensive lawsuit.

This will follow in America, be sure of it. The gay lobby prefers to go forward like the true Marxists that they are, with no effective opposition or criticism.

We are fighting to reverse our losses in Canada, losses that we could not prevent because our so-called wonderful conservative government sold us out and failed to fight to reverse any of these laws (passed under a previous Obama-like Liberal government around 2003-05).

You have the advantage of being able to prevent rather than restore. Use it wisely. Once they take this bridgehead, they will consolidate Marxist gains in all areas of society including education and the mass media to make homosexuality a new normal, good like green economy and weak defense, all the usual Marxist recipe for eventual collapse of your society.

Gay people are often quite different behind the scenes from how they are portrayed (or how they portray themselves) in public. Don’t trust them or their bland calls for tolerance and their false theology that suggests that God loves their lifestyle (because God loves sinners, but then they don’t want to be labelled sinners). This is the devil’s work. No wonder he looks like Obama in that mini-series. Somebody is trying to tell people something.


21 posted on 03/27/2013 7:24:42 PM PDT by Peter ODonnell (It wasn't this cold before global warming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

God was ruled unconstitutional 5-4.
The court’s majority could find no legitimate state justification of having a god in this day and age.

Obama praised the courts for upholding the principle of intellectual fairness.


22 posted on 03/27/2013 8:05:49 PM PDT by sickoflibs (To GOP : Any path to US citizenship IS putting them ahead in line. Stop lying about your position.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

It’s not really about homosexuality at all.
It’s about the loss of an appreciation for the beauty and sanctity of human life and protection of the ancient institution which has safeguarded it.
Children as commodities
Abortion
No-fault divorce
Artificial contraception
Adultery
The beauty of marriage has been eroded over a long period. Our culture doesn’t believe in marriage anymore, and this is yet one more step in destroying it.


23 posted on 03/27/2013 8:08:23 PM PDT by Ouchthatonehurt ("When you're going through hell, keep going." - Sir Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CitizenUSA

The Supreme court will one day rule just what specific acts they deem a “consumation” of perverts’ ‘marriages’.

Won’t that enhance the judiciary’s dignity in the public’s eyes...


24 posted on 03/27/2013 8:15:16 PM PDT by mrsmith (Dumb sluts: Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The 1st Amendment provides: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”. By implication, the proscription applies to the whole federal government, including especially for the present dispute, the federal courts. From the beginning of recorded history Religionists have been invested in defining marriage and teaching married couples their place in human civilization. If the SCOTUS is so arrogant as to redefine marriage, have they intruded into accepted religious subject matter? And thereby made a law respecting an establishment of religion? The Ninth Circuit has the same obligations. The courts must recognize the institution of marriage as an establishment of religion and leave it alone as the Constitution requires.


25 posted on 03/27/2013 9:48:03 PM PDT by AlienCrossfirePlayer (Photo IDs prevent voter fraud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Same sex marriage doesn’t bother me as long as both partners are of the same race.


26 posted on 03/28/2013 12:44:47 AM PDT by Brad from Tennessee (A politician can't give you anything he hasn't first stolen from you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

- Isaiah 5:20

27 posted on 03/28/2013 2:58:04 AM PDT by Rummyfan (Iraq: it's not about Iraq He could sure play that axe. RIP anymore, it's about the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Brad from Tennessee

You sir, have obviously suffered from Oxygen deprivation at some point.

Either that or you forgot your ‘sarc’ tag.


28 posted on 03/28/2013 5:51:07 AM PDT by RoadGumby (This is not where I belong, Take this world and give me Jesus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson