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

To: ansel12

Here’s my final statement to you on this issue. Take it for what it’s worth without reposting it into a digest of your reasoning.

For as long as we grant govt the right to define marriage, we are beholden to its interpretation of it by force of law, not God’s law, but bureaucratic law, and potentially tyrannical law. The 1st Amendment speaks to this.

Marriage is a sacrament of Faith between one man and one woman witnessed by God. I have no desire to arrest anyone that enjoys pretending it’s something else.

Any conclusions or extended meaning you draw from this should not be considered my views on the matter. So avoid the assertions, implications, and assumptions if you have anything further to say.

FRegards.


149 posted on 02/25/2012 4:37:11 PM PST by Gene Eric (Newt/Sarah 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies ]


To: Gene Eric
Marriage is a sacrament of Faith between one man and one woman witnessed by God. I have no desire to arrest anyone that enjoys pretending it’s something else.

According to you it would not be "pretending", it would be a legal definition of marriage. You are clearly saying that you want our common legal definition of marriage to be gone, and that it be replaced with no definition at all, it is whatever people say it is among themselves, polygamy, homosexual, whatever.

That would mean the Army has to count a Mormon's 18 wives as all legal wives. .

150 posted on 02/25/2012 4:49:40 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is unquestionably the weakest party front-runner in contemporary political history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | 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