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

Skip to comments.

William Murchison: The fantasy of gay 'marriage'
Manchester Union Leader ^ | April 19, 2009 | William Murchison

Posted on 04/19/2009 6:39:01 AM PDT by billorites

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

1 posted on 04/19/2009 6:39:01 AM PDT by billorites
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: billorites

Sadly, there is no recall mechanism for Iowa Supreme Court justices.


2 posted on 04/19/2009 6:41:46 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites

Marital bliss....what’s that?


3 posted on 04/19/2009 6:42:50 AM PDT by CindyDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites

One man and one woman, raising their children. Sounds like nature’s vote for natural selection. Makes you wonder if nature ever experimented with other combinations before.


4 posted on 04/19/2009 6:58:30 AM PDT by Bernard (If you always tell the truth, you never have to remember exactly what you said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites

Start a movement to require gays to marry.

(Illustrate the rediculous with rediculousness.)


5 posted on 04/19/2009 7:03:19 AM PDT by CPOSharky (Zero: I don't care about the country as long as I'm in charge. Forever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CindyDawg

Easy girl, don’t let it show.


6 posted on 04/19/2009 7:03:33 AM PDT by mick (Central Banker Capitalism is NOT Free Enterprise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mick

:’)


7 posted on 04/19/2009 7:05:29 AM PDT by CindyDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: billorites

We have allowed gubberment to define marriage and are shocked when folks are conditioned to believe “gay marriage” is possible because gubberment says so. I bet folks would respect marriage better if the gubberment had never stuck its beak into it. Now to most folks it seems a marriage can’t exist unless the gubberment issues a license, and since in some places they issue them to two men or two women these marriages must be possible. I mean, who on FR is shocked that the gubberment messed this up?

Gay marriage is just as possible as “female priests” and “male priestesses” no matter what the gubberment says.

freegards


8 posted on 04/19/2009 7:17:42 AM PDT by Ransomed (Son of Ransomed Says Keep the Faith!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites

Gay “marriage” is all about FORCING those who do not approve of sodomy and whatever it is that lesbians do and call it “sex” to have to APPROVE heartily of what they consider deviant, unscriptural behavior. So, Political Correctness for all and free “choice” for only the select or elite. From what I’ve seen, weddings are overblown, and marriages of all types generally blow over. I, frankly, don’t give a tinker’s damn what they do any more. I want to do productive stuff and don’t have time or energy for belly-button examining. The Barney Franks and Ellen DeGenereses of the world have brought me to the place where if they be filthy, then I have no choice but to allow them to be filthy without me getting my bowels all in an uproar.. but if it’s hearty approval and marching in “gay pride” parades they’re wanting from me, forget it! I wish no one ill, but get out of my face about it; I don’t flaunt my sexual preferences in their faces. It’s private.


9 posted on 04/19/2009 7:23:28 AM PDT by Twinkie (HITLER WAS A COMMUNITY ORGANIZER.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bernard
"One man and one woman, raising their children. Sounds like nature’s vote for natural selection."

And there's the heart of the issue of homosexuality. It's not natural. Q.E.D.

10 posted on 04/19/2009 7:25:00 AM PDT by frankenMonkey (www.citizendirect.org - this domain name for sale)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ransomed

The government should stay out of the marriage business all together. There is no reason for their involvement. We don’t need them for property or custody issues. You can just go to a court like other normal unmarried people to settle those disputes. And we certainly don’t need their approval for our relationships. Just get married in a church or vegas or a temple, etc.
At this point it would be difficult to untangle the chokehold, but I do wish goverment wasn’t involved in any marriage.


11 posted on 04/19/2009 7:28:05 AM PDT by floridavoter2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: billorites

Good article


12 posted on 04/19/2009 7:31:37 AM PDT by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites

Poeple forget that as recently as 2000 there was actually a debate among the ‘mos over whether they even wanted marriage or not. That year I worked on California’s Proposition 22 (the first one that the courts through out, causing Prop 8). We actually had a collection of those people who were happy to say marriage is not for us. These guys admitted to us in private that they didn’t want to be tied (so to speak) to just one partner.

The truth is that as they get their way more and more, “marriage” isn’t going to be so popular among the so-called “men. It’s the same reason young bachelors avoid it and it’s why immature men don’t stay married for long. Horny guys crave promiscuity, it’s an underlying animal instinct such as that practiced by alley cats.

Most normal men in stable society overcome this instinct before long, but homos live it day in and day out. Their perverted lust causes them to crave more and more sexual partners. Deep down there is something missing so they keep at it looking for satisfaction. This is why marriages won’t and can’t last long among the queers. I’m sure it’s happening already and only a matter of time before the media enablers can no longer sweep it under the carpet.


13 posted on 04/19/2009 7:48:46 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan (Reagan is back, and this time he's a woman.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: floridavoter2

“At this point it would be difficult to untangle the chokehold, but I do wish goverment wasn’t involved in any marriage.”

Yup, gubberment involvement, once started, is always super hard to get away from. And perhaps it was a good thing at one time. But a piece of paper from the gubberment doesn’t make anyone more or less married. If the gubberment refused to license Baptists to be married, well I as a Catholic would absolutely consider any Baptist marriages that took place without gubberment sanction to be absolutely valid as long as the marriage was between a man and woman.

Freegards


14 posted on 04/19/2009 7:50:01 AM PDT by Ransomed (Son of Ransomed Says Keep the Faith!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: billorites

Of course, the contra-argument is that traditional marriage is rife with divorce, infidelity, child abuse and the like. I have heard it over and over, butressed by the example of loving, long-term homosexual partners who are denied a legal and social expression of their relationships. But the argument is fallicious..one is the failed human response to a perfect social institution, the other a salutory human response to an imperfect human condition.


15 posted on 04/19/2009 7:50:01 AM PDT by yetidog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
Sadly, there is no recall mechanism for Iowa Supreme Court justices.

But, they can be voted out eventually.

16 posted on 04/19/2009 7:54:25 AM PDT by Ol' Sparky (Liberal Republicans are the greater of two evils)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: billorites

Why on earth aren’t talk radio show hosts like Rush and Hannity making these points?


17 posted on 04/19/2009 7:55:45 AM PDT by Ol' Sparky (Liberal Republicans are the greater of two evils)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites

Calling the union of homosexuals ‘marriage’ is like calling a hamburger ‘steak’.


18 posted on 04/19/2009 8:05:20 AM PDT by Erik Latranyi (Too many conservatives urge retreat when the war of politics doesn't go their way.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky

Do IA Supreme Court judges stand for reelection ?


19 posted on 04/19/2009 8:14:18 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Bernard
Makes you wonder if nature ever experimented with other combinations before.

It most certainly has resulting in the blissful state of "extinction"...

; )

20 posted on 04/19/2009 8:29:54 AM PDT by Caipirabob (Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 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.

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