Posted on 08/07/2006 5:14:14 AM PDT by Dane
I definitely concur. Thanks for posting it.
Proof that ellen goodman does not have the intellectual capacity of a mosquito.
All her arguments are based on the individual. The INDIVIDUAL who for whatever reason does not have a child.
Society encourages the formation of pairings which maximize the production and raising of children.
Ellen, an adopted child (even by aunts and uncles)can be raise in a totally normal mother and father environment. Homosexuals can NEVER EVER EVER have a normal relationship with a child.
Goodman is trapped in the nhilistic me me me me hedonism of the left wing of society.
"It was ruling in favor of 'procreationist marriage.'"
Well, duh.
That is what marriage is about -- it's not about two gals or two guys wanting to play house together.
Give thanks unto GOD!
Perhaps she really meant -
"...no EARTHLY reason..."
(No WORLDLY reason)
She is absolutely right!
There, however, a HEAVENLY one:
If you want to go there; "Go and sin no more."
This article is so ridiculous. It's hard to take Ellen Goodman seriously. The crux of this, beyond the procreation argument, is that there is no discrimination in marriage laws. All men and all women are treated the same. Any eligible man can marry any eligible woman. It's only sarcasm for her to ssay why doesn't the court refuse to marry people past menopause.
And she says the recent court decisions have not applied logic. Because she disagrees?
I know that society has changed and continues to change. If there were a groundswell of support for same sex marriage as a public policy and a legal matter, state after state would be voting to allow it, instead of state after state voting to ban it.
I hope more such cases are decided this way. Homosexuals will have to make the case in the legislatures and the court of public opinion that they deserve marriage rights. As with anyone who wants legislation passed on any subject, they will have to make the case. Instead of just finding a judge to impose the policy preference, they will have to convince non-gay people and non-liberal people that same sex marriage makes sense.
The 8th circuit says that the state has an interest in steering procreation into marriage. Since a homosexual relationship has absolutely zero chance of procreation, then the state has no interest in muddying up marriage with that non-procreative relationship.
Malachi 3:6
"I the LORD do not change. So you, O descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed.
Matthew 7:13-14
13. "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.
14. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
The Government (we stupid taxpayers) subsidize, by the thousands, illegitimate kids all over this country. It will be the ruin of us all if we do not STOP this insane practice!
(Why is there no MIC????)
I agree with that.
That's entirely different than what does take place, but the above is the correct policy.
It SAYS this, but practices the other!
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.