Posted on 06/16/2013 7:09:34 PM PDT by rhema
To demand that we recognize same-sex romantic relationships as marriages, and teach our children so, is to prevent them from discovering reality.
The speed at which marriage was redefined last month in the state of Minnesota has left me with a sense of vertigo. My head is still spinning. And though the war wages on, one thing seems clear: Those of us for whom same-sex marriage has been, until now, almost impossible to contemplate, have some things to figure out. Of those, the most urgent is the question of what we are to tell our children.
I am the mother of a ten-year-old girl, a beautiful child, more precious to me than anything you can imagine. When, on June 1, same-sex marriage became legal in the state of Minnesota, I needed to know what to tell her. How is this supposed to work—actually—in the concrete world of a ten-year-old child and her mother? Her father is wondering too, of course, but he is rather speechless at the moment. And the way it works in our house, though he is really good at protecting her from possible physical threats, it usually falls to me to protect her from the more psychological threats she encounters occasionally in her young life. But this is a new one. So I need some advice.
In the interests of full disclosure, I should state that, as a philosopher, I have gotten fairly skilled at treating the philosophical errors of our age in the classroom setting. But a ten-year-old is at a bit of a disadvantage when it comes to the arguments I have developed against relativism, nominalism, dualism, materialism, and so on. And then of course, parenting comes with its own specific challenges. So I am hoping those who advocate same-sex marriage have given some thought to
(Excerpt) Read more at thepublicdiscourse.com ...
It’s sin, therefore it’s wrong. So is shacking up. Kids WANT their parents to teach them right from wrong.
If you’re a believer, tell them what God Almighty says about it. If you’re not, make up whatever floats your boat. One lie is just as good as another.
The final paragraph in the article:
For when you ask my daughter to accept that a man may marry another man, that a woman may marry another woman, you are asking her to suspend her capacity to judge the world around her and judge it truly. You are requiring her to declare that 2 + 2 = 5 as an act of victory over her natural inclination toward the true and the good. You are trying to trap her in a world where nothing is as it seems.
Tell them the gummint is wrong that two guys and two girls anad a girl and a chicken and a guy and a goldfish cannot be married.., it takes one human with a wienie and one human without a wienie to be married
It is also an object lesson in that just because something is legal, it isn't necessarily right.
Fine spot to segue into how The Almighty makes the rules, and human attempts to rewrite them are not only folly, but have a tendency to end very badly for those who think themselves smarter than their Creator.
oh AND you marry for life, not serial monogamy
Plus, she leaves no room for the fact that (reality not withstanding), peoples feelings are hurt when they don't get what they want...
You're totally right, though.
Marriage is the legal device we use to protect a biological relationship that predates language. Humans happen to be a species whose biology pushes us towards mating for life.
Changing legal terminology so that any two people can be called “married”, regardless of whether they have a biologically determined relationship does not change our biology.
Marriage is, and will always be, the bond between a mated pair of humans. Mates can only be one male and one female.
the reason men marry women is to be connected to their children
since when would you ever discuss this topic with a ten year old???
Agree. My question is: which word are you going to redefine next? Which word, which has meant the same for centuries, will fall by the wayside next? (ok, so two questions)
The ones pushing the hardest to install the agenda of the Father of Lies are the ones who scoff the fiercest at his very existence. This judge who declared by fiat that girls of any age must have access to the “Plan B” contraceptive pill is a prime example. They will all get the chance to meet him in person, later, including all these the godless advocates busy redefining God’s creation.
You would need to discuss it if in the course of visiting one of our numerous lake park playgrounds here in Mn, you are faced with the question: "daddy, why does that boy call both of those men, 'dad'"?
Marriage is the legal device we use to protect a biological relationship that predates language. Humans happen to be a species whose biology pushes us towards mating for life. Changing legal terminology so that any two people can be called “married”, regardless of whether they have a biologically determined relationship does not change our biology. Marriage is, and will always be, the bond between a mated pair of humans. Mates can only be one male and one female.
Well, it seems to me that the definition of “parent” is being attacked, as well. Didn’t some judge recently declare that a child’s parents were two women, or some other biologically ludicrous thing like that?
I’m laughing so hard that I’m actually coughing uncontrollably.
(Of course,the cigarettes I smoked earlier might have something to do with it.)
:)
Yes. I believe parents are now listed as Parent 1 and Parent 2. The same with the new marriage licenses......spouse 1 and spouse 2. Really detrimental to our culture. What am I saying.....WHAT CULTURE?
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.