Posted on 11/09/2014 3:57:26 PM PST by CharlesOConnell
This triangle of truisms, of father, mother and child, cannot be destroyed; it can only destroy those civilizations which disregard it. – G.K. Chesterton
Question to Canonist Ed Peters:
If the Court presumes to equate our Matrimony, the Queen of Sacraments, with Sodomy;
Can we not regard the action as having abrogated the terms of the civil rite, rendering what was formerly a mirror or echo of the essential Sacrament, now a ludicrous parody?
Co-Author with Sherif Girgis and Robert P. George of “What Is Marriage“, Heritage Foundation speaker Ryan T Anderson, rather unilaterally “debated” some of this question with CNN’s Piers Morgan and Suze Orman, the latter living an active homosexual lifestyle in a “committed relationship” spanning more than a decade.
(The video has been removed from the LifeSiteNews article “Must-see video: A marriage expert’s masterful handling of Piers Morgan” by Rob Bluey Thurday, March 28, 2013. See it here: http://www.sacra-pizza-man.org/ryan-anderson-videos-removed-from-lifesitenews-get-em-here/)
Mr. Anderson refers to the fact that in all fifty states, religious institutions are legally capable of performing [counterfeit] “marriage” ceremonies for people of any lifestyle persuasion; therefore, why is it necessary that government attempt to alter the definition of authentic, natural marriage?
In light of the universal availability already of this “marriage” parody, why should we continue to legitimize the civil rite, if the Court so unwisely equates it with a civil abomination?
Should we not turn the tables and stop suffering the tax-code marriage penalty?
Can we morally go through civil divorce en masse?
bfl
/johnny
I’ve wondered about this myself. I was married in a church. The state also considered me married, and I had no problem with that.
Now that the state has (for the most part) re-defined marriage, is the state part of the marriage still binding or should it be?
Depends on what you were married to — he, she, it, boy, girl, sheep, dog, sheepdog,cat, Ferris Wheel, blue pillow, brother, sister. Please be more specific.
My wife and I were married by a judge (a friend) rather than in church. When they passed same-sex “marriage” I told my wife they just repealed our marriage. I would like to get re-married in church but my wife thinks I’m a little crazy. So I guess we’re just going to live in sin now.
“I would like to get re-married in church but my wife thinks I’m a little crazy. So I guess we’re just going to live in sin now.”
Go for it. If she thinks your a little crazy so what...
“Depends on what you were married to — he, she, it, boy, girl, sheep, dog, sheepdog,cat, Ferris Wheel, blue pillow, brother, sister. Please be more specific.”
It was 47 years ago... You figure it out.
if people want to show their love and their loyalty and their desire for a family unit UNDER GOD, then the churchs can marry them, them that will....
once the financial benefit is done away with, you will not see mikey and spikey marrying.....nor carol and meryl....
its sort of like the holiday of Christmas...actually a HOLYDAY...
but take away the govt free get out of work days and make people take vacation to get it off, THEN we'll see the real Christians....
I agree...
Wonder if the Catholic church would do that...
Get married in a church. Promise your wife a second HONEYMOON! :o)
Hey, I'd go for that.
Don’t base your decisions on what the
enemy does.
Or a new diamond wedding ring.
My wife and I got married by ELVIS; in the Little Chapel of The Desert, 41 years ago this coming May.
So far it has been interesting to say the least. I tried to talk her into a church ceremony about 10 years ago; she told me it was a waste of time and money and “I would never be more married than I was right at that moment”, her words not mine, and I haven’t forgotten them for a single second.
Looking forward to the next 41 years, it just keeps getting more and more interesting.
once the financial benefit is done away with, you will not see mikey and spikey marrying.....nor carol and meryl...
...I have been saying for quite some time...without much success, apparently...that the only reason for sodomite demand of marriage in lieu of civil union turns on the issue of tax exemption...specifically estate tax exemption...
...and it seems the gluttonous state has gotten trapped in its own political correctness quagmire, and permits the travesty of a marriage between Bob and Ben even while tax receipts evaporates when one of the twinkies passes on...
It would be quite a powerful act, a mass divorce from marriage. Leave the sodomites hold the bag of parody all alone, while presenting undeniable proof what this redefinition had done to marriage, completely obliterating their pathetic denials.
ANY diamond would do. I do love diamonds. What female doesn’t?
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.