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

To: AppyPappy

You raise a valid question. I don't claim to have all the answers (as many in this thread think they have).

My message was meant to trigger a discussion about how much we want government to regulate human intimacy.

I support government intervention or "interference into relationships" whenever harm or injury occurs -- such as spousal abuse and domestic violence.

The ease of getting a divorce is not the issue. The real issue is that many individuals apparently do not know the person they marry. Many years ago I lived with my boss and his "wife". They had been together for 5 years and had a daughter. I then learned that they were not married and they decided to get married. Three years after their marriage, they divorced. Go figure!

I am troubled by the undisguised hostility which is revealed in some of the messages in this thread. Those who speak about "God's law" or "offense to God" are not going to be amenable to any reasoned argument. I am curious, however, about what role within our society these folks think is acceptable for gay men and women? Should gays be allowed to vote? Should gays be allowed to achieve prominence in their professions? Should gays be allowed to receive awards and public recognition? Aren't all of these things "an offense to God" from their point of view?


139 posted on 12/23/2004 8:44:31 AM PST by Ernie.cal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies ]


To: Ernie.cal; AppyPappy

Second time:

Stop hiding from the polygammy issue. Why do you think your marriage defintion must stop at any two persons? Why not three or five.

Stop hiding.



145 posted on 12/23/2004 8:46:12 AM PST by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies ]

To: Ernie.cal
Second time on this issue as well.

You: GAY BROTHERS: How many gay brothers do you suppose there are in our country? If they ALL decided to marry, what adverse consequence do you anticipate occurring?

Me: So, you would permit gay brothers or sisters to marry. Thank you for being clear. Now, how about a father and son? Father and 18 year old daughter? Please state your reasons why or why not in each case.

Stop hiding.

149 posted on 12/23/2004 8:48:47 AM PST by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies ]

To: Ernie.cal
My message was meant to trigger a discussion about how much we want government to regulate human intimacy.

Government does not regulate human intimacy between two consenting adults. Period.

150 posted on 12/23/2004 8:48:48 AM PST by crv16
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies ]

To: Ernie.cal
I am troubled by the undisguised hostility which is revealed in some of the messages in this thread. Those who speak about "God's law" or "offense to God" are not going to be amenable to any reasoned argument.

Will all due respect, you asked for opinions and that's what you get. They aren't going to come to your house and make you watch Davey and Goliath or anything. That's simply why they believe what they believe.

There is no real need for gay marriage except for the few who desire recognition to make themselves feel better. The government offers benefits to married hetero couples because the government views them as the most stable family unit. A same sex unit is not as stable nor does it need the benefits because it cannot produce children without outside interference. Children do not occur naturally to the relationship. Also those relationships are viewed as less than proper for obvious reasons. There is no NEED for government-sanctioned support for those relationships. When marriage was instituted eons ago, women needed men to care for them especially as they grow older. Stability helped women survive.

In the 21st century, there is only one debate: Marriage or no marriage. You cannot start creating "new" marriages to add on.

158 posted on 12/23/2004 8:53:15 AM PST by AppyPappy (If You're Not A Part Of The Solution, There's Good Money To Be Made In Prolonging The Problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies ]

To: Ernie.cal

Gays should be allowed the same right as the rest of us. They do have those rights. They just shouldn't be allowed
to redefine words or get special rights or force the rest
of the world to LOOK AT ME..SEE ME....ADMIRE MY CHOICE.

(caps because it's the in your face gay way to say)
We don't want big gov't, but we don't want small
deviant groups to define the normal thing either.


196 posted on 12/23/2004 9:19:12 AM PST by jusduat (I am a strange and recurring anomaly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies ]

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