Posted on 06/22/2014 6:52:45 PM PDT by Kaslin
What the old mother-father marriages are now competing against is these newfangled pasted-together me-too “families.”
With society as badly fractured as it is, maybe it follows reality more closely for secular government to recognize households rather than marriages. Maybe marriages should be kept within the auspices of houses of religious worship. Maybe. One virtue of that is that churches, rather than governments, would be charged with such questions as what is “cheating too bad” to be married.
God’s design for marriage cannot be changed nor altered in opposite manner nor can the perversion of that design be claimed as a basic human right. Its a human wrong both morally and biologically for same gender seeking so-called marriage rights and benefits.
No way should the church sanction it since scripture is clearly in opposition to it.
BTTT
Marriage and the family is the bedrock of civilization. It took thousand of years of hard work by ancient jews to make it happen.
Marriage makes proper channels for sexuality and fertility. A woman is constrained to give her children only one possible father, and a man is constrained to acknowledge his children and provide for them. Not equal but complementary. I believe it was a rabbi who wrote an essay that explained that so well. As much as I hate to admit it, it allows for polygyny, although the Christian West decreed that polygyny is not compatible with what society ought to be.
Now the West seems to think that marriage is a public acknowledgement of romantic attachment and personal fulfillment.
But I can't read that headline and not have the wedding scene from The Princess Bride come to mind.
Self-fulfillment, which it can’t ever truly do. Both partners would be sucking the other emotionally dry.
“Now, since the family and human society at large spring from marriage, these men will on no account allow matrimony to be the subject of the jurisdiction of the Church. Nay, they endeavor to deprive it of all holiness, and so bring it within the contracted sphere of those rights which, having been instituted by man, are ruled and administered by the civil jurisprudence of the community. Wherefore it necessarily follows that they attribute all power over marriage to civil rulers, and allow none whatever to the Church; and, when the Church exercises any such power, they think that she acts either by favor of the civil authority or to its injury. Now is the time, they say, for the heads of the State to vindicate their rights unflinchingly, and to do their best to settle all that relates to marriage according as to them seems good.”
Pope Leo XIII, 1880
People accepting ‘gay marriage’ is a result of them being conditioned to think the state defines marriage, that if the state accepts such a thing, no matter how impossible, then of course it must be able to exist. It’s to the point that although a religious group might actually believe that ‘gay marriage’ is somehow theologically possible, they won’t perform ceremonies for their gay members unless the state they are in accepts it first.
Freegards
This speech is 50 years too late.
A "contractual household" could serve many needs, if the contracts were enforced. This would be a big improvement over the present legal status of marriage, which is a "relationship at will."
Please explain picture. Who is this?
Thanks
Unsure what that means.
50 years ago this particular demon hadn’t raised its head.
Divorce. Unwed parenthood. The pulpits have been SILENT on these issues for decades as the family was destroyed. Abortion was condemned but the begetting and raising children in the context of Sacramental marriage has not been a topic in the majority of Catholic churches as it should have been. Only now are they speaking up for marriage and family. Too few, too little, too late.
There are many beauties in the Lord’s arrangement of families that go unrecognized in far too many churches both Catholic and Protestant. Leave and cleave to be sure, but the multifarious beauties in the cleaving are not much aired — maybe because Christian marriages have gotten more superficial too. A factoid of recent times keeps on bugging my head, that the divorce rates of people who say they are committed Christians are virtually the same as those who have no committed faith. This is a p*ss-poor reflection of Christ’s love, if I may be pardoned the blunt language.
With society as badly fractured as it is, maybe it follows reality more closely for secular government to recognize households rather than marriages.
...whatever families end up being called, it won’t change the basic, and really the only reason, supporting same sex marriage...estate tax law...
...the vigorous push to recognize same sex marriage was launched by ‘partners’ who considered themselves entitled to their significant other’s assets at death, in complete contravention to traditional tax law...so they worked to develop a mechanism to make the law work for them, without having to pay an onerous estate tax burden...
...et voila! Same sex spouses, spouses who could inherit assets free of tax consequence...mere civil unions could no no such thing, it had to be a marriage...thanks to state governments infringing on private estate settlements, and establishing a hierarchy of tax burden, based on familial relationship...
...pure, unadulterated greed, both by government and private citizen, has led us down this primrose path, whereby we see lechery elevated to routine status...
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.