Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 11/21/2003 6:42:36 AM PST by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: SJackson
PC will mandate by law the ban of the use mother and father. Talkshows already use "co-parent".

Homosexuality need to be taught as morally wrong beyond just religious reasons. Marriage is a public institution that needs protection from these deviants.
2 posted on 11/21/2003 6:58:25 AM PST by longtermmemmory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson
But it does not disturb the fundamental value of marriage in our society

For these peole this is true because, to them, there is no fundamental value to marriage. Marx didn't believe in it so there is none.

3 posted on 11/21/2003 7:11:12 AM PST by arthurus (fighting them OVER THERE is better than fighting them OVER HERE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson
So, when two lesbains or two homosexuals get married, how do the guest know who is the husband and who is the wife? Better yet, how do they decide?
5 posted on 11/21/2003 7:23:49 AM PST by thiscouldbemoreconfusing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson
Here is another slippery slope to consider. By making gay marriages legal, any attempt to differentiate between a gay or traditional marriage is opened up to a legal challenge.

This means not just adoption, but also the performing of wedding ceremonies by priests, and the membership requirements of churches too. I think you will see the courts ruling that churches may not refuse to perform gay weddings or refuse membership to anyone in a gay marriage long before you see some polygamy case. Churches that won't knuckle under to the courts could lose their tax-free status or worse.

Far fetched? In 1887 Congress passed the Edmunds-Tucker Act. This statute disincorporated a large church and seized nearly all its property because they disagreed with the state over the definition of marriage. The issue then was polygamy, but ironically the act give a precedent that can easily be turned against churches that hold to the traditional definition of marriage.
10 posted on 11/21/2003 7:47:04 AM PST by Grig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson

21 posted on 11/21/2003 10:03:23 AM PST by Revolting cat! (Far out, man, heavy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson
Of course the most radical redefinition of marriage in centuries is going to have deeply disturbing consequences.

And those deeply disturbing consequences are the very reason the homosexual activists and their bots are pushing the gay agenda.

Note that in "Brave New World" the words "mother" and "father" were deeply offensive words, never to be used in polite society.

24 posted on 11/21/2003 10:29:43 AM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson