Skip to comments.
What's More Sacred, Marriage or the Constitution?
June 30th, 2003
| Sabertooth
Posted on 06/30/2003 6:25:02 PM PDT by Sabertooth
With talk of a Constitutional Amendment preserving the traditional definition of marriage, this subject came up on another thread.
I thought I'd throw it out to the forum for discussion.
TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: banfudgepackers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-64 next last
I vote for marriage. It's divinely ordained, and has been around longer.
To: CheneyChick; vikingchick; Victoria Delsoul; WIMom; kmiller1k; mhking; rdb3; Travis McGee; Shermy; ..
((((((growl)))))
To: Sabertooth
Sacred? Gotta be marriage.
3
posted on
06/30/2003 6:27:15 PM PDT
by
ntnychik
To: Sabertooth
I hope it never comes down to an either or situation.
4
posted on
06/30/2003 6:27:28 PM PDT
by
KantianBurke
(The Federal govt should be protecting us from terrorists, not handing out goodies)
To: Sabertooth
Any marriage worth saving will survive any Supreme Court decision.
To: Sabertooth
I don't think you can compare the two -- one is of Caesar, and one is of God.
6
posted on
06/30/2003 6:28:45 PM PDT
by
ellery
To: Sabertooth
Marriage of course.
7
posted on
06/30/2003 6:29:48 PM PDT
by
bluebunny
To: NittanyLion
Over here.
To: Sabertooth
If a Constitutional Ammendment could be passed that prohibited same-sex marriages, then one could just as easily be passed to a) criminalize abortion, or b) repeal the Income Tax, or c) overrule the Supreme Court's bogus interpretation of the 'commerce clause,' or d) overrule the Supreme Court's bogus interpretation of the 'necessary and proper' clause, or e) deny the Supreme Court it's bogus use of the 'compelling state interest' justification for permitting whatever Unconstitutional government action they take a fancy to.
9
posted on
06/30/2003 6:30:21 PM PDT
by
sourcery
(The Evil Party thinks their opponents are stupid. The Stupid Party thinks their opponents are evil.)
To: Sabertooth
I vote the Constitution. Marriage is a social contract between two individuals, the Constitution is the political contract between our state and our people.
10
posted on
06/30/2003 6:31:57 PM PDT
by
xm177e2
(Stalinists, Maoists, Ba'athists, Pacifists: Why are they always on the same side?)
To: Sabertooth
Good question.
Marriage is older. The sacred union between two people will outlast any Constitution, because in the end, constitutions always get amended, fall apart, and ultimately fail.
11
posted on
06/30/2003 6:31:57 PM PDT
by
Cathryn Crawford
(Check out my blog at: http://cathryncrawford.blogspot.com)
To: Sabertooth
Considering the current divorce rate, and the growing number of childless married couples, I'd have to go with the Constitution at this point. Personally, I'd take the same as well. If you really love someone and plan to be with them the rest of your life, do you really need a contract?
But then again, that could be because I'm a godless sinner agnostic. ;)
12
posted on
06/30/2003 6:31:58 PM PDT
by
Quick1
To: Sabertooth
Yep, hands down Marriage. What's more likely to be desecrated: Marriage or the Constitution?
Well the Constitution has already been desecrated with the right to privacy overturning state's rights. That will lead to Marriage being desecrated.
13
posted on
06/30/2003 6:32:43 PM PDT
by
DannyTN
(Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
To: Sabertooth
The Constitution was based on Biblical principles. Marriage was ordained as a Godly sacrament. The latter is more sacred.
14
posted on
06/30/2003 6:33:33 PM PDT
by
gitmo
(The perfect symbol for democracy: the guillotine.)
To: sourcery
Yeah, kinda whets the appetite, doesn't it?
To: Sabertooth
marriage. It is the building block of ever society. The socialists work overtime to deconstruct marriage and family because it is the threat. The roles of each gender in a family threaten the leftist. The possibility of loyalty to the family over loyalty to the state irks the left. (the old USSR had a special award to children who turned in their parents as enemies of the state)
Marriage, preserve marriage and you preserve the constitution.
To: Sabertooth
Agreed.
To: Sabertooth
If you're using sacred in the "highly valued" definition of the word, I vote Constitution. That paper is suppose to guarantee my right to marry whoever I prefer. Other societal contracts include arranged marriages. Besides, I believe marriage was invented by man - freedom was not.
Although I hate to see the slipperly slope this is heading down, I believe free consenting adults can join in whatever contractual arrangements they want. That said, I don't believe gays should be allowed to adopt.
To: Victoria Delsoul
You do?
To: Sabertooth
You know I do.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-64 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson