Posted on 05/27/2014 9:13:38 AM PDT by C19fan
Same-sex marriage is becoming a national inevitability. A cascade of court opinions, significant public support, not to mention increasingly sympathetic gay couples and increasingly implausible opposition—all these and more point to an emerging national consensus that “gay marriage” is actually a form of “marriage.” It’s not exactly clear when the hump took place—but we definitely seem to be over it.
............................................................
And what about those post-racial and post-gender millennials? What happens when a queer-identified, mostly-heterosexual woman with plenty of LGBT friends gets married? Do we really think that because she is “from Venus,” she will be interested in a heteronormative, sex-negative, patriarchal system of partnership?
If not, the future of marriage, in fact, may turn out to be a lot like the Christian Right’s nightmare: a sex-positive, body-affirming compact between two adults that allows for a wide range of intimate and emotional experience. Maybe no one will be the “husband” (as in, animal husbandry) and no one the chattel. Maybe instead of jealousy, non-monogamous couples will cultivate “compersion” to take pleasure in their partners’ sexual delight. And most dangerously, maybe marriage will be only one of many forms of such a compact; maybe people will choose their own intimate futures without coercion from the state. The horror!
(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com ...
A cascade of court opinions, significant public support, not to mention increasingly sympathetic gay couples and increasingly implausible opposition—all these and more point to an emerging national consensus that “gay marriage” is actually a form of “marriage.” …A plethora of straw men.
Of course we were right.
Polyamorous, pedophiic, and incestuous “marriages” are imminent. The meaning of marriage has been changed. Like much of the lexicon of the left, it means whatever the user wants it to mean. There is no anchor in reality.
They don’t want to be married, they just want to stick it to normal people by destroying marriage.
They actually just want to have a big cluster every night.
I could have lived without that phrase.
It’s maddening how the libertarians just roll over for this critical issue to wash over them, but become indignantly unmoving when the issue is wealth confiscation.
I’d like to phrase it this way:
“Wealth confiscation through increased taxation is becoming a national inevitability. A cascade of court opinions, significant public support, not to mention increasingly sympathetic economically unequal people and increasingly implausible opposition—all these and more point to an emerging national consensus that wealth confiscation is actually a form of ‘capitalism.’”
There, how’s that for capitulation?
RE: Were Christians Right About Gay Marriage All Along?
YES.
It would be interesting to see how many gay marriages there are actually are.
We called Horse Plop a Horse Plop.
They prefer to serve two masters, no matter the consequence.
It’s not a question as to whether “Christians” who were right or wrong,
but whether God’s Word is the authority on what is right or wrong.
> We called Horse Plop a Horse Plop.
Heh. We call it road apples, pasture patties, meadow muffins, though the last two are more often associated with bovine scat.
Let us pray that this ignoble excursion into cultural self-immolation may run its course, leaving in its wake a minimum of personal and societal scars.
Look up "reality" in your dictionary, and then look up "belief."
... Reality is that which exists and beliefs (including muslim beliefs) belong in church.
Romans 1 says that
God’s wrath is reveal from heaven as ... acceptance of homosexuality (for one).
So, it’s not a matter of this _leading_ to judgment.
It IS judgment.
Of course we were right!
Scrap a time-tested and thoroughly proven model that has evolved independently in each of the Earth’s distinct societies on a whim. And with nary a clue what will come afterwards.
Yeah, real smart!
The problem is we are allowing liberals to define the argument. Marriage isn’t about love and sex it is about institutionalizing a process for establishing “Parental Units”. It is about “the children”.
Gays are non-reproductive therefore they do not meet the basic requirement for marriage.
That is an optimistic take. Me being the curmudgeon and observing the zeitgeist thinks this is another step down the road towards complete atomization and removal of any sort of communal norms. First SSM now Polygamy!
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.