Rooted in the self-evident, the marriage of one man and one woman in mutual fidelity is the sine qua non of a healthy human civilization. Here, the equality[4] and complementarity of male and female equals diversity in service to unity,[5] and uniquely provides the necessary social adhesive of trust which is then modeled for our children.[6]
Thus, here are seven questions[7] that same-sex marriage advocates need to address, which first need to be addressed before any further legal action can be contemplated.
`
Could there be anything more inherently wrong than something, if universally practiced, would end mankind?
Talk about your counter-productive talking points!
Haven’t conservatives and Christians figured out yet that dragging God or the Bible into the discussion promptly ends it, and not in our favor?
I don’t believe that’s the way it should be, but surely one of the leading principles of conservatism is to recognize reality when it hits you in the eye.
IOW, when you’re in a really, really deep hole, stop digging.
Over decades it would be, in theory, possible to bring back a society in which it’s possible to use such arguments effectively. But today they are utterly counter-productive.
Same Sex advocates deny the existence of a Creator or a God in Heaven. I have this argument with “Liberal Christian” friends who say Jesus would love homosexuals and that Jesus wants them to be happy in their lifestyle and that I’m a bigot for wanting them to repent. That Jesus doesn’t want them to repent either. And that Jesus made them that way because He loves them.
This is the “replacement” theology of the liberals who have disregarded the message of the Gospel and have created their own liberal gospel to promote their own lifestyle
Re-reading the seven churches in Revelation reminds me if the perilous times we are in
Same-sex marriage agenda is about destroying the Judeo / Christian values of western civilization and it's culture...
Change the value and meaning of "marriage", then any perverse and unnatural values and cultures will fill the void...
is a hetero sexual impulse rational ...yes it is necessarily built in to drive reproduction of the species....it has a critical function
So next question, is a homosexual impulse rational? ...
Politics always rests upon a moral foundation.
In our case, what ails us is beyond politics, quite simply because the foundation has crumbled. We keep hoping for the next election to turn things around, hanging on for the next candidate to move the center back to the right, but it never happens, or if it happens its only for a moment before the shift left resumes.
Until we address the deeper moral foundation we’ll never fix what ails us.
Fix the moral and spiritual sickness and the politics will take care of itself. Fail to fix the deeper sickness and the politics will continue to be just shuffleboard on the Titanic.
It is wrong for gov’t to decide what is marriage.
Gov’t is responsible for law. If the gov’t wants to create a shortcut document to share property between two or more people, then it should do so in a totally blind way.
Your premise is flawed for a basic reason, the radical homosexuals consider their god to be immediate pleasure and satisfaction while Christians consider God to the the Almighty. Asking them to consider God in their thinking is a dead end. They have long since written him off since he disagrees with their lifestyle as well. He will get his chance to write them off in his own time.
Marriage like human rights comes from God, not man. Therefore man can no more change marriage than he can change the direction of the setting sun.
My question is : What business does government have meddling in what is either a religious issue or a social issue?
My answer: none.
Government should stay out of marriage altogether. It is none of the government’s business if I am married. I should not be taxed more or less because of it. And I should not have to tell the government on a tax form (or any other form that I can think of) whether I am married. .
And I should not be forced, as a private citizen, to recognize someone else’s perversion of marriage.
Marriage, as it has been recognized by Christians and Jews and most societies in the world for thousands of years is one man and one woman. Redefining words that up until now everyone understood seems to be a tactic of the left-wing fascists who are hell-bent on destroying America and its culture.
(Ironic, isn’t it, that they try to mimic the heterosexual culture and practices that they so despise?)
If homosexuals want to have some sort of official committed relationship, there is not much I can do to stop them. But whatever it is they have is not a marriage.
ping