Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Cato in PA

There are plenty of laws regarding marriage (where someone can marry a person that YOU may not).

If someone is ALREADY married (or unable to get divorced) you cannot marry that person.

If someone is a blood relation, you cannot marry that person.

If someone is underage you cannot marry that person.

Why is it so hard for 0.05% of the population to accept that if you are a member of the same sex, that you may not marry that person???


8 posted on 06/20/2014 10:42:08 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (The new witchhunt: "Do you NOW, . . . or have you EVER , . . supported traditional marriage?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: a fool in paradise

To all of those laws, I would add “for now.” The deviants’ end goal is to define down morality to such a degree that marriage will cease to be a relevant institution.

They’ll coach their arguments in “consent,” as they do now, and tell us that we have no right to interfere with two consenting individuals (notice I didn’t say “adults” or even “people”). After all, if two individuals agree on something, it must be right in the moral relativist’s world.

Every time they make headway with defining down morality, they celebrate because they’re foisted their perverted view of the world on good people that much more. That’s why they get their kicks.


17 posted on 06/20/2014 1:36:50 PM PDT by Cato in PA (Resist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: a fool in paradise
If someone is a blood relation, you cannot marry that person.

That would be news to a lot of our country cousins.

18 posted on 06/20/2014 5:29:02 PM PDT by Genoa (Starve the beast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


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