Skip to comments.
What's More Sacred, Marriage or the Constitution?
June 30th, 2003
| Sabertooth
Posted on 06/30/2003 6:25:02 PM PDT by Sabertooth
With talk of a Constitutional Amendment preserving the traditional definition of marriage, this subject came up on another thread.
I thought I'd throw it out to the forum for discussion.
TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: banfudgepackers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-64 next last
To: Sabertooth
I think an Amendment "might" be in order --- as provided by our Founders --- those wise men, nary a one homosexual.
21
posted on
06/30/2003 6:37:24 PM PDT
by
onyx
(Name an honest democrat? I can't either!)
To: Sabertooth
I vote for the Constitution...
While there is no doubt marriage is a sacred rite in the religious sense, the future of this nation and 225 years of tradition depend upon that written contract between the government and the people. The aggregate impact of all marriages can move society in one direction or the other, but a change in the Constitution can immediately do so - and to a tremendous ectent.
Indeed, I would argue that, with every instance of government overreaching its bounds, the institution of marriage is damaged. Failure to heed the Constitution itself damages personal responsibility and undermines marriage.
To: Sabertooth
If such a basic,normal bedrock foundation of our society(marriage) is now subjected to debate by the pseudo intelligentsia, to the point that our elected "leaders" consider an ammendment to the constitution is needed-then our society has indeed already fallen.
Lock and load folks.
Atlas has shrugged.
23
posted on
06/30/2003 6:37:56 PM PDT
by
sarasmom
(Punish France.Ignore Germany.Forgive Russia..)
To: Sabertooth
I vote Constitution. A lot of folks have a a number of marriages and change em a lot. I only need one Constitution and it doesn't need a lot of changing.
24
posted on
06/30/2003 6:38:12 PM PDT
by
BikerNYC
To: Sabertooth
I vote for marriage. It's divinely ordained Speaking from a Mullah's "devinely ordained" position, polygamy is okay, too.
To: Sabertooth
The Constitution is not sacred. Worth dying to protect sure, but not sacrificing my soul for. My soul has been made whole in my marriage.
To: Sabertooth
False choice and a false dilemma. If forced to chose with a gun to my head, I'd say marriage since the COnstitution is an imperfect document and a good marriage is based on Biblical principles and something God endorses.
27
posted on
06/30/2003 6:39:09 PM PDT
by
nmh
To: Sabertooth
BTW, thanks for posting this. How have you been?
In a sign of solidarity for my Florida friends, I vote for the Constitution a second time. ;-)
To: Sabertooth
Almost like asking if it's hotter in the summer than it is in the city.
29
posted on
06/30/2003 6:39:44 PM PDT
by
Rudder
To: Coleus; PhiKapMom; I_Love_My_Husband; MHGinTN
Ping
30
posted on
06/30/2003 6:39:56 PM PDT
by
Calpernia
(Remember the three R's: Respect for self; Respect for others; Responsibility for all your actions.)
To: Sabertooth
Marriage is a religious institution that "the state" in its various forms has, for practical reasons, had to acknowledge and endorse.
The constitution is a state construction that recognizes certain "natural rights" of individuals that supercede the interest or needs of the state.
The two concepts have no business interfering with each other.
31
posted on
06/30/2003 6:39:59 PM PDT
by
Ramius
To: Sabertooth
I don't see how this an "either/ or" question? Adding an amendment is not destroying the constitution.
32
posted on
06/30/2003 6:40:34 PM PDT
by
Sonny M
("oderint dum metuant")
To: Sabertooth
Marriage is less sacred today. With the divorce rate in this country, marriage is like buying a new car. Some people savor their car as it ages, babying it, loving it. Others wait a few years for the newer models to come out.
The constitution has endured longer in America at least, than marriages have in this country.
To: Sabertooth
Marriage is more sacred, but it shows how far our system of government has deteriorated that this question has to be asked. For most of American history, no one would have ever dreamed that the Constitution and traditional marriage were incompatible with one another. We're now on the verge of being told by our black robed dictators that the western concept of marriage is "unconstitutional".
34
posted on
06/30/2003 6:41:17 PM PDT
by
puroresu
To: Ramius
The two concepts have no business interfering with each other.
Relax, it's just a question to spark a little conversation.
To: nmh
False choice and a false dilemma.
Of course it is, we're just shooting the breeze. No gun to your head.
To: Sabertooth
Relax, it's just a question to spark a little conversation. I am relaxed. I'm conversing. :-) No worries here...
37
posted on
06/30/2003 6:44:09 PM PDT
by
Ramius
To: BikerNYC
The Constitution constantly changes, and will ultimately fail.
It may not need changing in your eyes, but it WILL change. That's a certianty.
38
posted on
06/30/2003 6:44:15 PM PDT
by
Cathryn Crawford
(Check out my blog at: http://cathryncrawford.blogspot.com)
To: Sonny M
I don't see how this an "either/ or" question?
In the real world, it isn't. This is the internet, answer or die.
To: Sabertooth
The Constitution.
Marriage is sacred...but not all are married. The Constitution is the law we set down, to how we live and allow ourselves to be governed....married or not.
The OT had 10 Commandments...Jesus had 2 Commandments...neither was about marriage.....both were about how we are to live our lives.
40
posted on
06/30/2003 6:44:45 PM PDT
by
stylin19a
(this space for rent)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-64 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson