Lon
Well-known member
He is just saying that 'marriage' protects families that have kids and is uniquely able to protect them.
It doesn't need debate, just clarification, unless you disagree with that point.
Justice Kennedy needs a reminder about his own fear of harm from gay marriage
- Thread starter GFR7
- Start date
It doesn't need debate, just clarification, unless you disagree with that point.
Sure, you simply want to deny them certain rights.:yawn:
Soft bigotry's in some ways worse than the outright brazen variety.
TracerBullet
New member
GFR7
New member
No, I don't. I don't view marriage as a right, but as a duty and a burden dumped on straight people by nature and God.
GFR7
New member
If you're really this cynical that might explain a lot.
It is though. We have the right to associate and enter into all sorts of contracts. The limitations on those are supposed to be rational and tied to the notion of capacity and equity.
lain: I'm afraid to ask. Else, one of the best things that ever happened to me for all sorts of reasons.
GFR7
New member
If I thought this way, things would be different.......far different.......
For so many, it is the worst that could happen to them.........
How is that *happening to you*? You know ... someone else being equal?
That says volumes in regards to your view on marriage. Dumped. On. Straight. People.
GFR7
New member
My own marriage , though, I would give worlds to have back.
I don't see it as having validity insofar as it being the *only* reason for marriage. It would make more sense if he was stating that the criteria for marriage is being able to biologically produce a child.
However, that point would not hold up under scrutiny because there would be many straight couples who would be a marriage license or mandated to divorce once they could no longer produce children.
And yet you would deny that right to others ... for one reason. You don't want them to be happy.
GFR7
New member
No, gays can be just as happy, building a life together and sharing all. Nothing is stopping them from having that. My wife was my best friend despite being my wife - not because of it.
YOUR WIFE. Don't pretend to not see the difference. You wish to dictate how others are allowed to live a happy life.
IF you were told you wouldn't be allowed to legally marry her, you would not have been fine with that decision.
Now that makes me sad, because if you believe in a Christian marriage your estimation of your wife should be enriched by that bond before God, as should your happiness.
Lon
Well-known member
Rather, I think the product of a marriage is naturally cared for by the producers. It is a bit crass and basal as such because love for one's kids is beyond that, but it is certainly true, I believe without exception, that kids within the married family structure are well cared for. This isn't to disclude anything, just say that organic families have an exceptional (not without exception) ability to care for and safe-keep what is their own.
I think, that is where they were going. It happens naturally (well, per God's design in this world).
As such,there is a spirituality that atheists and agnostics can't deny. We are called to love one another as Christians. Everything in creation points to the love of/in a family unit, I believe, on purpose.
-Lon
GFR7
New member
Well, our families of origin prevented such association.
Sorry to hear that, I suppose what bothered me is that on the one hand you seem to be extolling the virtue of a distinct and protected state while on the other hand not having much good to say about it.
I remember a fellow writing along those lines, but more consistently in approach when he said, "If you don't particularly like gays, let them get married. Serves them right." Something like that.
Now I don't mean to make a different sort of mistake by idealizing what is a thing of serious consideration and work, but if you give it that a marriage should be a foundational rock for your day to day, much like faith, which is why I think the bride/bridegroom is used to describe that particular.