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

To: DuncanWaring

That thought occurred to me many years ago.


Here is another one: We are not discriminating against “them”. Our laws are not designed for groups or even for married couples. They are designed for the individual citizen. And “they” have the exact same marriage rights you and I have. There is no discrimination here. The problem is that they want to do something that is not only not allowed, but it attempts to dramatically alter the meaning of plain english words.

Marriage is between a man and a woman. It always has been and always will be. Just as “gay” means happy. Only lunatics think “gay” refers to a man who enjoys pushing his penis into another man’s anus, or being the receiver of said penis.

And only lunatics call two men committing to doing that to each other until death “married”.

The law is very fair, whether you are straight or homosexual you can get married only under these circumstances:

1. Neither party is already married.
2. The parties are not blood relatives, e.g. brother and sister or mother and son.
3. The two parties are of opposite sexes.

And number three is the reason the institution exists in the first place. If mankind did not procreate via sex, there would be no such thing as marriage. Calling the joining of two humans that don’t meet the third condition “marriage” is ludicrous on the face of it. You might as well say a guy is married to his harley.

Which brings us to why this is so important to “them”: This is an attempt from the great deceiver himself to dilute a gift of God - and proof we really are in the end times as described in prophetic, biblical scripture.


26 posted on 02/14/2014 8:48:23 AM PST by cuban leaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: cuban leaf

A point I make periodically is that there is no “right” to marriage.

Marriage has historically been an obligation undertaken by two people prior to engaging in activities that might reasonably be expected to lead to children; and if not before, then shortly thereafter.

The purpose being to maximize the likelihood that said children mature to become self-sufficient human beings.

Since no homosexual activity can produce children, the concept of homosexual “marriage” is moot.

And, as you mentioned, there are lots of limitations on heterosexual marriage. Only one is that it be heterosexual.

Their side claims that “Any two people who love each other should be allowed to marry”. I love my mother, she loves me. Should we be allowed to marry? If not, why not. About there, their heads start to explode.


29 posted on 02/14/2014 10:53:15 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | 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