[tpaine]

Outlawcam wrote:

Let's talk about this for a second. Why is protecting the essence of family life important in our country?

Keyes:
" --- If we embrace homosexuality as a proper basis for marriage, we are saying that it is possible to have a marriage state that in principle excludes procreation and is based simply on the premise of selfish hedonism. This is unacceptable."

_____________________________________

This 'hedonism' position may be 'unacceptable' to Keyes, and to other members of the Republican Party, but it is certainly not well thought out on a Constitutional basis.
The only Constitutional basis for government regulation of marriage is in the enforcing of civil law, -- in the protection of individual rights.

The morality of who is contracted in marriage to whom is simply none of the States business.

-- Unless the rights of one or more of the parties involved -- [& in particular, - children] are being violated, governments have no legal basis to interfere in civil contracts of marriage.

This issue is a tempest in a teapot simply because government has given favorable tax & insurance benefits to 'traditional' married couples. The solution is equally simple. End the favoritism.
Find other ways to promote family values.

Cam:
I think you have that backwards. What favorable tax and insurance benefits do they get that are not available to homosexuals who happen to be a "couple?"

Ask them.. I don't pay to much attention to the details of what the queers rant on about.
Nor do I pay much attention to the details of the proposed "Marriage Amendment"..
The whole concept is a Constitutional joke. -- A political idiocy that will backfire on the Republican Party.

[outlawcam]

I don't pay to much attention to the details of what the queers rant on about.

I asked you because you made the assertion. Back it up.

[TOUGH STOUGH]

Homosexuals in this country are not oppressed, repressed or any other kind of 'pressed. I am sick and tired of arguments to the contrary. They can live together, have sex with one another (no one's peekin' in their bedrooms), acquire property, work, vacation etc (and do). They have legal means to assure the distribution of their property, or handling of their estate upon death and can even author living wills which will give their partners the same rights to make decisions regarding their health during illness and death as married spouses have.

The legal definition of marriage should not be changed to accommodate their desires. We have seen what happens to the family and how it is further destroyed, when the definition of marriage is changed to permit homosexual marriage in places like Sweden for instance.

We all must stand firmly against the changing of the legal definition of marriage, to include homosexual marriage or any other kind of marital arrangement other than one man or one woman. We cannot allow homosexuals or any other group to hurt traditional marriage and traditional values any further.