More properly speaking, homosexual monogamy...
Two homosexuals cannot be "monogamous" because the word denotes a biological procreation they are not capable of together; human reproductive biology is an obvious secular standard.
Marriage is a religious "rite," not a civil "right;" a secular standard of human reproductive biology united with the Judaic Adam and Eve model of monogamy in creationist belief.
All adults have privilege to marry one consenting adult of opposite gender; therefore, Fourteenth Amendment "equal protection" argument about "privileges and immunities" for homosexual marriage is invalid. Driving, marriage, legal and medical practices are not enumerated rights; they are privileged practices that require statutory license. Nothing that requires a license is a right.
It was landmark U.S. Supreme Court precedent Reynolds v. United States in 1878 that made "separation of church and state" a dubiously legitimate point of case law, but more importantly; it confirmed the Constitutionality in statutory regulation of marriage practices. Congress, state legislatures and public referenda have statutorily determined polygamous, pederast, homosexual, and incestuous marriages are unlawful. No Constitutional Amendment restricting marriage is required to regulate "practice" according to the Reynolds decision.
"Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices..."Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145, 8 Otto 145, 24 L. Ed. 244 (1878).]
See also: Late Corporation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. United States, 136 U.S. 1, 10 S.Ct. 792, 34 L. Ed. 478 (1890). Revised as 140 U.S. 665, 11 S.Ct. 884, 35 L. Ed. 592 (1891).
Homosexual monogamy advocates are a cult of perversion seeking ceremonious sanctification for voluntary deviancy with anatomical function and desperately pursuing esoteric absolution to justify their guilt-ridden egos. This has no secular standard; it is an idolatrous fetish. Why not properly apply the adjudicated Reynolds 'separation of church and state' here?
No person can logically say that carnal practices engaged by homosexuals are consistent with human anatomical function. It is obvious, and an impervious secular argument to say that biology is a standard by which we can measure. The hormonal drive to mate is biologically heterosexual. Either homosexuality is a choice, a birth defect, or it is a mental illness. Take your pick.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
But other than getting sucked into feeling it necessary to even comment about a such a red-herring impossibility,...
I'm not sure if that red-herring wasn't really the whole point of it with everything else gratuitously and sloppily constructed around it...
macamadamia's tagline says it well: “The great dangerous non-sequitur du jour”
Pay special attention to the mention of the “Nuclear Option.”
The left is frothing at the prospect of losing their stranglehold on the Supreme Court and fear their holy grail of homosexual monogamy will go down in flames...
* little jeremiah - - psychological dynamics ping...* they will do anything to slip the homosexual agenda into any story...
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
The Nuclear Option
If you want to be added to this list, please notify me...
Originally, the Nuclear Option Ping List started out as a practical joke. With all the vitriolic response I received from certain un-named individuals, I figured it would be a great idea to do it for real...
I have observed here on Free Republic, a never ending flaming of religious folks and conservatives by people who promote things such as drug abuse, homosexuality, the ritual murder of abortion and other garbage.
Not being an orthodox or ecumenical atheist, it has really stretched my patience. I do not think policemen are jack-booted thugs, nor do I look at people who want to protect their families from filthy scum as brownshirts.
The purpose of this is to alert people to the cultural Marxism run amok... Drugs, sex perverts, pornography (in film and in music), marijuana, liquor, bashing the religious people, destroying social institutions (like marriage and the Boy Scouts), etc., etc.,... ad nausea...
The druggies like the sex perverts can only perpetuate an ever increasing market for their filth by molesting the minds and bodies of the young ones... this is the only way they get new Demo-rat voters... CHEMICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE!
It is no coincidence Islamic pagans hate Israel, Jews, Christians and Western Civilization. The entire basis of Western Civilization is Mosaic Law, something both the Neo-Pagan Left and the pagan Islamic thugs cannot abide and wish to destroy.
The very idea that human beings have individual rights not subject to the whims of a monarch, but subject to the laws of Yahweh, is directly from Moses.
Historically, this is proven over and over again with the succsessive conflicts between the forces of paganism and the Judaic culture. It is being played out here and all over the world today...
Observing this as an atheist, I prefer the paradigm of a Judaic culture to the chaotic death cult of New Age neo-pagan absurdity.
The idea that "gay marriage" is inevitable, so we should just accept it, is like the advice that used to be given to women if a rapist attacked - just lie back and take it, since it's inevitable.
Fight evil, without stopping; it's the right thing to do. I wish I could remember Churchill's statement about fighting evil if it we lose.
I agree with some stuff; but why that "gay" promotion?
Actually your take on marriage is demonstrably wrong in historical terms: Roman civil marriage was also monogamous and owed nothing to Jewish Scripture. It was Roman civil marriage, not Jewish marriage, which became the basis for Christian marriage. Marriages between Christians were Roman civil marriages undertaken with the blessing of the bishop until at least the time of Justinian (whose novellas permit either priests or notaries to conclude marriages), and were not a strictly religious affair until the transfer of all marriages between free citizens to the Church by Leo VI in the 9th century, and all marriages by Alexis I in the late 11th century.
How the transition from civil to Church marriage was handled in the lands which ceased to be under Imperial control thanks to barbarian invasions, I don not know: perhaps one of our knowledgable Latins can fill in.
Marriage is a natural institution, Church (or other religious) marriage is the sanctification of that institution, and civil marriage its acknowledgment by the state. The baleful effects of 'gay marriage' in our already debauched culture lie primarily in the redefinition of the natural institution as the content of its state recognition so that the natural institution is abolished and replaced with a statist construct.