Posted on 01/05/2014 1:53:12 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
In modern America, sex is increasingly where it should be: outside the reach of government. Anti-sodomy statutes have been tossed by the Supreme Court. Contraception is widely accessible. Anyone with a computer can gorge on pornography without fear of prosecution.
Same-sex marriage has been legalized in 18 states and the District of Columbia. Now another step has been taken to expel police and legislators from the bedrooms of consenting adults: a federal court decision striking down a key element of Utah's ban on polygamy.
Last month, District Judge Clark Waddoups ruled that the law infringes not only on constitutionally protected sexual privacy but on the free exercise of religion. Utah, he concluded, doesn't have to issue multiple marriage licenses to Kody Brown and his consorts, who appear in the reality TV show "Sister Wives." But it can't dictate their living arrangements.
The group belongs to a renegade Mormon sect that regards polygamy as sanctioned by God. Brown is legally married to one of the women and "spiritually married" to the other three. Together, at last count, they have 17 children.
If a man and a woman want to live together and call themselves partners, buddies, teammates, friends with benefits or Bonnie and Clyde, the government will leave them alone. Ditto if a guy can entice several fertile females to shack up with him and spawn a noisy horde of offspring.
But in Utah, it matters what the man calls the women living with him. If he refers to them as wives, he can go to prison. The law covers not only formal polygamous marriage but any relationships in which a married person "purports to marry another person or cohabits with another person." That was the provision ruled unconstitutional....
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
I have never seen anyone more arrogant and talk-down-to-you than leftists and RINOs
Too bad you made all that up, I merely informed you on the realities of politics and how people vote.
Those hostile to traditional American faith, are overwhelmingly democrat voters.
Those supportive of it, are overwhelmingly conservative voters.
Traditional American values don’t normally win over the atheists, so exceptions are just exceptions, they don’t mean anything or have much valuable input to conservatism.
From atheism to moderate faith, to intense Christian faith (Bible thumpers to lefties), the level of conservatism usually matches the degree of Christian faith.
That is just the facts as born out in voting breakdowns.
No, I do not see marriage as subject to government approval - that's all. And I pointed out that your examples were bogus, because they were voluntary, since the banns were acknowledged as adequate without government intervention, and they came solely from the churches.
"Anti-American" is nonsense - I quoted the freaking Constituion and the limited powers of government. I can't GET more American than that.
But what IS "anti-American" is your insistence that the government is the final arbitrator of marriage. You disdain a person's personal relationship with God, and demand government approval for "legality" - but never define this "legality."
Socialists, communists, liberals and Leftists COMPLETELY agree with you. They do not believe marriage should exist outside of the powers of the State either. But they take it to the next step - the one you won't look at. Which is that when the State is the only LEGAL arbiter of marriage, nothing BUT the State is necessary for a LEGAL marriage. Which means religions aren't necessary under such conditions - which is exactly what has happened in EVERY communist State.
So while you say I'm anti-American for upholding the 1st Amendment freedom of religion protecting marriage outside of State-lincensed marriage, my response to you is that you are trying to kill religion - ALL religion - completely, by rendering it ILLEGAL unless it is approved by the State. That might start with marriage - but Obamacare has shown that the government is now deciding what parts of religion are legal, what are not. The government now denies freedom of conscience over abortion for Christians, on the grounds that the Christian teachings against abortion are ILLEGAL. Sound familiar? Like, EXACTLY what you are saying about what YOU say is the role government should play in marriage?
People like you are always the same - you want full government power for your particular beliefs, and then you're always surprised when it gets completely out of control. Then you "didn't mean it." Bah. You're a child.
Confused rantings.
If you don’t care if you are married by law, then don’t, you have always had that option, so has everyone else.
If promoting polygamy and gay marriage makes you feel more religious than 1790 Americans who only allowed straight marriage as legal, then so be it.
Confused examples - non-participation in a particular religion does not mean I support it by allowing it to exist. The alternative to that is simply wiping out everyone who doesn't agree with you. America stands for just a little bit more than that. And if you are fine with the government declaring Christianity illegal for denying abortions, anad Christmas illegal literally because it is celebrated by Christians - as it is doing BOTH right now - in addition to it declaring what is, and is not marriage, and thereby replacing society, culture an civilization entirely with the State, then so be it.
Now you are really raving.
America does not stand for gay marriage and polygamy and your war against marriage and the founding of America and it’s centuries of history.
You really are calling for, and insisting on gay marriage and polygamy and anything else.
I am amazed at the number of FReepers willing to basically abolish the concept of marriage, which is exactly what the perverted left wants to do.
Each man and woman determining their own standards, one way or another, and unaccountable to anyone.... Each man clearly to himself.
What really baffles me is them calling for it in the name of God and the constitution, and pretending that we reject the American founding in opposing gay marriage and polygamy.
The bizarre childishness of thinking that marriage should not even exist in any concrete way, that it be erased.
>> I am amazed at the number of FReepers willing to basically abolish the concept of marriage
It’s about statism and the grip it has on the way we associate.
The natural tendency for a free society gives we what expect.
Those are your words, not mine. Speak for yourself and stop putting words in my mouth. You’ve lost the argument and now you’re resorting to naked slander. Knock it off and grow up. Believe it or not, some people actually disagree with you. Learn to deal with it without being such a jerk.
Amen to your post!
No, you are pushing more than just gay marriage and polygamy, you are pushing the childish idea that marriage end in America, by just letting anyone and everyone make up whatever they want for the word, as long as they call it a religion, and you want it to become the law.
I know it is incoherent and bizarre, and childish, but it is what you are raving about.
There are about 3 or 4 of you guys who do this, it is your unique way to get to gay marriage and a rejection of traditional America, by calling for it in the name of God and the founding fathers, or some such crazy nonsense.
This is the internet, there are about 3 or 4 of those nut cases here, see post 114.
lol
What a hilarious bunch of BS. Happily a lot of others responded to your silliness since I haven’t got the time to waste on it.
But one little point genius - do you recall me saying anything about religion?
It isn’t about religion.
Your ignorance of how the law works, and the interaction between the 1st Amendment and religion, and the very doctrine of negative rights itself, is so profound that it is impossible to discuss this subject with you. You are the incoherent one, you are the childish one, because you want to define America outside of the Constitution. News flash - there is no America outside of the Constitution.
But one little point genius - do you recall me saying anything about religion?
It isn’t about religion.
l'm sorry, have we met? Please include a quote reference so that I know to what you are referring. Thanks.
You know, you can't seem to post without using insulting words - incoherent, bizarre, childish, raving, crazy.
I think it's because you can't make your point. You are basically a statist, and you don't want to admit it. You're a statist because you want the state to be the final arbiter of religion in America, and you want the state to declare whether religions are legal or not, and you want to take marriage OUT of religion and make it a purely state authorized legalism, but you don't want to admit that that i want you want, because it violates every single Constitutional and American principle.
So your little trick is to declare both side of the subject together and contradict yourself, and then cover it with feigned outrage and accuse me of what YOU are doing - being childish, bizarre, incoherent, raving and crazy. That way, you think you will deprive me of the ability to point out what you are doing, because you will have accused me of those things first - even though you can't point to a single thing I've said that fits those words.
But there's something you don't understand - I don't obey your declarations merely because you declare them. I have no problem pointing out your inconsistensies, your hypocrisies, your abusive language, and the utter Constitutional emptiness of what you are actually claiming.
Here's what I think - I think you're trying to confuse this issue as much as possible. I think you're trying to enrage and provoke people who are disgusted with polygamy and gay marriage, and work them into a righteous fury, so that they get so mad that they turn against their own Constitution. I think you are playing a very nasty head game with your readers.
But it won't work. The Founders made the solution to people like you 230 years ago. The limited government of the Constitution denies people like you the either-or scenario, and provides a third way of "hands off." And the Democrats now making Christianity literally illegal under Obamacare means that people are looking straight at YOUR "solution" in trusting the all-powerful government to determine what religion is, and isn't.
That's why your helper shills are running in now, trying the new tack that marriage isn't about religion. Oh, that will go over well with Christians and "traditional Americans." LOL! Take marriage out of religion altogether - and where does it end up? With the State, just like you want it to be.
Marriage is between two people - it's whatever THEY want it to be. If THEY want it to be Christian, it's Christian. If THEY want it to be Muslim, it's Muslim. The ONLY limitations are the criminal ones - marriage cannot be used to commit crimes. Otherwise, from a Christian point of view, who has the more "illegal" or "immoral" marriage - homosexuals who declare themselves married before the State, or Muslims who declare themselves married before Allah, or Hindus who declare themselves married before Devi, or Buddhists who declare themselves married before the Great Void. Do godd, upstanding, traditional American Christians accept ANY of these marriages as valid before God? LOL, not only do they not, Protestants don't even consider Catholics properly married, and visa-versa!
And you would throw out the Constitution in this matter?
Your words mean nothing.
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.