Posted on 07/31/2011 2:47:45 PM PDT by Steelfish
Edited on 07/31/2011 5:23:27 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
EDITORIAL A Gay-Wedding Crasher A law professor attempts to use a homosexual rights ruling to defend a polygamous family in Utah.
In this file photo, (pic in URL) Kody Brown poses with his wives Janelle, Christine, Meri, and Robyn for TLC's reality TV show, "Sister Wives." The Browns' attorney, Jonathan Turley, filed a lawsuit challenging the Utah bigamy law that makes their lifestyle illegal.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Mornin’ Nana. Wait until you get to the FUN posts later on.
Will you answer all these questions honestly?
________________________________________
Whats honest about living in sin sans the covering of matrimony ???
Good morning
:)
I'm not at all surprised to see that a troll who has been pushing things like euthanasia for years will also push same-sex "marriage."
Governments have been involved in marriage for nearly a thousand years and from a practical standpoint they MUST be involved if for no other reason than divorce is a civil matter when it comes to child custody and property.
Liberaltarians like you have recently adopted the "get government out of marriage" talking point so that you can help accomplish the left's agenda without appearing to do so. The end result is the same and that is that people like you WANT sodomites to be allowed to "marry" each other.
Free Republic is a CONSERVATIVE forum, not some libertarian cesspool. The GOP was FOUNDED with two goals, to end slavery and to insure that marriage was between ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN.
Free Republic is a pro-family site. And that includes one man, one woman marriage. If you want to push for some other kind of unnatural family (which wouldn’t be a family at all) you’re not welcome here, so get the hell off FR!!
Can’t make it any plainer than that.
I’ve been watching you push homosexual marriage for a while now. You push for a redefinition of marriage. If you can’t have state recognition of homosexual “marriage” you say real marriages should be outlawed. You sure backpedaled quickly when JR called you a troll. Now you’re trying to redefine yourself. You’re suddenly speaking out against homosexual “marriage,” and claiming that you don’t support it. How long do you think you can keep this pretense up?
Liberaltarian perversion promoters will keep doing it trying to stay under the radar until the day they are banned. They can’t help it or stop it because they are driven.
And yet they can’t come out and speak their mind now, because they are cowards. So they lie until they don’t even have enough courage for that, and then they just hide. Pitiful cowards.
Exactly. People who cannot debate their points fair and square and then run and hide like cockroaches when the light turns on are despicable.
Of course all their arguments are circuitous duplicity as well.
the absurd volunteer system of the past is what created the mess.
remember marriage is also about PRIVATE property rights, inheritance, paternity and a host of other institutional issues.
The left wants no property rights and children as property of the state with zero parental rights. (just go to an ABA convention)
I should clarify. I mean where it’s possible to have one without the other. For example, in Germany, you can have a church wedding without a civil marriage.
But then again, politics has a habit of leaving out plenty of convenient facts that can avoid a need for such disputes as we see here. The real aim of the marriage rights is to try and criminalize things that Christians belief, a.k.a a quest to criminalize thought, and probe out the politically incorrect. Of course, Christianity and most other organized religions don’t really for the most part have much effect. I can ignore Mormon missionaries, Jehvoah’s witnesses, and pretty much anyone else who bothers proselytizing or giving handouts as I please. However, according to the whole marriage rights agenda, it’s twisted to the point where what they’re saying is that there’s people out there who think otherwise, because anyone on this planet can think that, people must hurt themselves to say that belief is evil, and so on. Quite the opposite of Thomas Jefferson’s statement which I only partially agree with: It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods, or no Gods, it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. I agree in the sense that while yes, who knows what my neighbor believes, it’s not really at my pay grade to bother trying to probe into every person’s beliefs, that’s God’s job. However, anyone who thinks that it’s their right, politicians with hate crimes legislation included, those are the kinds of people to be scared of, there’s an agende bigger than sanctioning perverse acts, and its about policing thought, something that America was supposedly about getting over.
As for the guys with their 13 or 14 year-old girls, like Jeffs, the guy broke local law, punish the #$%^$# as a pedophile, break up his ranch, and get the matter over with, as you would with any other pedophile, or rapist.
Well, here’s the story, which plenty of people don’t get. You make laws because experience shows you can’t trust people to do the right thing on their own. Marriage was a nice institution at one point, not perfect, but definitely better, then, when the problems such as serial divorce came into full swing, you had a rise in issues that led to the need of getting a system for assigning parental responsibility, or for giving recognition at times. As bad as legally sanctioned marriage is right now, you can’t exactly throw it out like a baby with dirty bath water either. I wouldn’t trust society to work well after spontaneously throwing away the marriage license business, IMO.
As usual, your comments are gems of information and truthful conclusions.
(Begging an article to post as a vanity....sorry, can’t help myself.)
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.