Excerpting your own material on FR
May engender the wrath of our residents.
Most notably - The BLatting OG.
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 ...
Which has nothing to do with anything, except your personal feelings or your personal church members, the Mosque, or the Gay Church of the Goats may have different internals, it isn't law.
You do mention what should be a well known point though, people can and always could, call whatever they wanted, "marriage" between themselves or their group or within their church, the Mormons do today for instance they marry dead people, but it isn't legal so who cares?
Society and the government has to know what a legal marriage is.
I don’t know about the term ‘traditional marriage’, but they definitely should stop using the word ‘gay’.
I try to avoid using the term ‘traditional marriage’ when I can.
It implies that there is some sort of non-traditional marriage, which there isn’t.
There is only one type of marriage, and everything else is just a delusional attempt to make disturbed people feel normal.
If I have a real Rolex watch (I wish) and you have a fake one that you got at a market somewhere, I don’t say that my Rolex is ‘traditional’.
No, my Rolex is a damn Rolex, and you’re an idiot with a fake piece of crap around your wrist.
“...If I have a real Rolex watch (I wish) and you have a fake one that you got at a market somewhere, I don’t say that my Rolex is ‘traditional’.
No, my Rolex is a damn Rolex, and you’re an idiot with a fake piece of crap around your wrist.”
Bingo ! ! !
This Wittgensteinian use of Language-—is to control “perceptions”. He who controls the words determine the “worldview”. The Marxist control over publications and media-—and schools (USDOE) is to control worldview-—erase the Individualism in Christianity-—to erase Christian Ethics. (to collapse culture).
In using the term-—”traditional” marriage-—you are stating that there are other legitimate types of “marriages”-—so you are normalizing the idea that there are all sorts of possible “marriages”. Same with putting “homosexual” in front of the word “marriage”-—it normalizes the irrational concept—esp. in children. What was odd—becomes normal after decades of using that term.
Same with the word “gender”. It is to open up the possibility of more than just boy and girl (now they have “its” in Sweden—genderless children) (irrational/removal of Reason/Natural Law(Science) from the minds of children.......it is like the word “partner”-—to destroy the concepts of wife and husband-—words eradicated in “new” children’s books decades ago to normalize the concept of non-married couples living together.
Whether you realize this or not-—worldview is created by language-—by the emotions tied to the words-—and they use “operate conditioning” on ALL CHILDREN in public school (embedded in the Billy Ayers curricula) and in TV shows-—which will elicit the “correct” emotion (one permitted) which is tied to a concept——like sodomy = Good/Right and Chrisitanity = Bigot/hater. These concepts are in their literature/questions/history lessons-—everything-—math “problems” and their “sex ed” which will destroy Virtue in children.
I am reading “Sex Education: the Final Plague”. It outlines how Sex Ed was inserted into public and private schools over the last 70 years—and by whom—evil Atheist/Sodomites/Satanists/Marxists—who all want to destroy Christian Ethics-—because it uses Natural Law and Reason and Individual Rights from God. Can’t have that in unjust/slave societies.
Literally-—Sex Ed during Latency and post-Latency erases morality in those exposed to “Sex Ed” which promotes perversions and unnatural ideas which they embed in children to normalize evil as good. Flips morality-—to the using of the body as an object (means to an end) which is slavery/prostitution/homosexuality-—all dehumanizes and leads to nihilism and the destruction of culture—for totalitarian state.
I always thought he word “queer” was apt.
I really resent them co-opting the word “gay.”
No
How does it make sense to abandon a term 100% of people understand?
Real marriage?
That’s a great picture. Horrific without being a horrible or sleazy picture. I will use sweet little OG in one of my games.
Do you recall where you found it?
Well said.
There’s real, conjugal, natural law marriage.
And then there’s fake, non-conjugal, unnatural, erzatz, government-defined marriage.
See you, ZOT Hole...
What’s wong with you?
Why do you have such a hard time accepting absolutes in the face of ambiguity?
You....Make...me...Thick....
Digthugthing bathuhd....
Welcome to FR.
Make your point by publishing the entire article on FR. We don’t like leaving the compound to service alternate agencies.
I hope you have a good point to make concerning semantics.
>> I think government should get out of marriage and leave it to the churches
I completely agree.
>> A Mod Lecture Series
priceless
>> What is the alternative word or phrase that you propose we use?
Marriage
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.