Posted on 10/11/2013 9:24:17 PM PDT by Collegiate Theist
It seems like any time someone wishes to express their opposition to the redefinition of marriage, they start by extolling the virtues of so-called “traditional marriage”. In doing so, their intentions are undoubtedly to explain why it is that succumbing to the push for a more “inclusive” definition of marriage would be harmful to society. Their choice of words, though, may very well hinder their argument....
Whole article: http://collegiatetheist.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/should-social-conservatives-abandon-the-phrase-traditional-marriage/
(Excerpt) Read more at collegiatetheist.wordpress.com ...
I agree to a point. I don't believe that most Americans embrace or approve of deviant sexual behavior. That's just what the DBM wants us to think.
According to those same DBM "journolists", the homosexual population is only about 3 - 4% of the total population of the country. Other than advancing liberal philosophy, I don't understand why they want to fall on their swords over 3 - 4% of the population.
Between Hollyweird and the DBM, the homosexual agenda has been crammed down our throats since the 90s. No wonder America's "attitude" about gays changed so quickly - we were being indoctrinated that they are harmless.
I have to go. I hear Nero playing his fiddle . . . . . . .
Social Security would have to be eliminated too.
Civilization has rested on marriage as a foundation for millenia, but hey lets take that risk!
Having an authority recognize that marriage is between a man and a woman requires an “iron fist”?... please
You sound like a libertarian, ready to toss away civilization itself and stomp it into the ground as an affront to your liberty.
Because the underlying principle - that you should be able to f*** who you want, how you want, when and where you want without regard to social conventions or God's laws, and send the bill for the resulting damages to someone else, is popular with a whole LOT more than 3-4% of the population.
destroying social conventions, even the ones that are the bedrock foundation of society and you can bet the libertopians will be right there with them
Should social conservatives abandon the phrase “traditional marriage”?
Umm... Why?
Well, the rest of the article can be edited in by the mods.
You just drop them a note via the “report abuse” link and say “oops, here’s the rest of my article if you could please edit it into the main body?”
Excerpting is....very annoying when the material is your own.
There ARE, however, some sources that do need to be excerpted.
That is found in the links on this page:
http://freerepublic.com/~adminmoderator/
Do you really think you’re going to sway anyone on a staunchly Conservative forum?
You’re riding for a hot fall outa here, pal.
Would you rather have a government that forces homosexuality on the society or a government too small to influence the nature of marriage? We’re currently living the former, so I’m confused by your objections. The reference to libertarianism is irrelevant. The inference society abandons traditional marriage is incorrect.
Actually, Jim, it was a rhetorical question.
Yes, so you would agree, I presume, that THAT institution was destroyed in 1969, that practicing it is now illegal in all 50 states?
Nope, it STILL exists no matter what the government does.
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.