The Battle To Define Marriage

0 Shares
133971494

Rush Limbaugh said that allowing gay marriage in America is now “inevitable.” Do you agree?

The popular talk-show host told his radio audience the issue was lost when the word “marriage” was redefined. “So far as I’m concerned, once we started talking about ‘gay marriage,’ ‘traditional marriage,’ ‘opposite-sex marriage,’ ‘same-sex marriage,’ ‘hetero-marriage,’ we lost. It was over. It was just a matter of time.”

It is amazing to me how quickly sentiment on this issue has changed. When the Defense of Marriage Act was introduced in Congress in 1996, the measure defining “marriage” as the union of one man and one woman enjoyed overwhelming popular support. It sailed through the House of Representatives by a vote of 342-67 and by an 85-14 vote in the Senate. It was promptly signed into law by then-President Bill Clinton.

Now, the former President says he regrets that decision. He has been outspoken in his support for the right of gays and lesbians to marry. And he hopes that the Supreme Court will declare that the legislation he himself signed into law is ruled unConstitutional.

Most of the Democratic Senators who voted for the measure agree with him. Of the 36 who are still in the Senate, 27 have come out in support of gay marriage. There has not been nearly as big a shift on the Republican side of the aisle. Of the 51 Republican senators who voted for DOMA and are still in office, only two have changed their position.

DOMA was one of two challenges to the definition of marriage that occupied the Supreme Court (and much of the media) last week. The other was California’s Proposition 8, an amendment to the California constitution approved by voters in 2008.

The California initiative was in response to a ruling by the California Supreme Court overturning an earlier measure, Proposition 22, that tried to outlaw same-sex marriage in the State. But Proposition 22 was an ordinary statute, not a constitutional amendment. It was invalidated by the California Supreme Court in 2008. Opposition to that ruling led to the passage of Proposition 8 later that year.

Of course, that measure quickly faced legal challenges. In 2010, U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker ruled that the new measure was also unConstitutional. However, at the same time he also issued a stay of his ruling, pending appeal.

Last year, a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with Walker’s decision but also continued a stay on the ruling until it could be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. And that’s where the matter stands today.

Same-sex marriages are now legal in nine States and Washington, D.C., as the result of court rulings, statutory changes made by legislative bodies and popular vote.

Across the country, voters in a majority of States have said that marriage should be defined as the union of one man and one woman. Thirty-eight States have passed legislation banning same-sex marriages, most in the form of amendments to their constitutions. You won’t be surprised to learn that these are among the more conservative States in the union; in fact, Mitt Romney carried 24 of them last November.

So what happens now? There’s no question what the advocates of marriage equality want to see: a Supreme Court decision declaring unequivocally that gays and lesbians have a Constitutional right to marry in every State, no matter what the local laws or State constitution might say.

Meanwhile, about the best the opponents can do is hope that the Supreme Court will agree that this should not be a Federal issue and that, instead, the requirements for getting married should be left to the individual States to decide, as has been the case for more than 200 years.

You won’t be surprised to learn that that is my own position as well. By and large, I have a very “live and let live” attitude. I don’t care if a gay couple wants to live together. I don’t want any say in what their domestic arrangements should be. Voters in three States have agreed to allow them to get married in their State, and I have no doubt that number will increase. I just don’t want to see it done as a matter of judicial decree.

It’s difficult to argue what our Founding Fathers would say on the subject, since they would undoubtedly be dumbfounded by the suggestion that homosexual couples should be allowed to marry. However, they did establish some clear Constitutional principles that I hope would apply here.

First is the principle that most matters should not be up to the Federal government to decide. It is good for different States to have different policies on different matters. Competition and diversity are positives, not negatives; they will lead to more benefits than any proscribed uniformity.

Who can get married and under what circumstances should not be a matter for the Federal government to decide. It never has been in the past; it shouldn’t be in the future.

Marriage licenses aren’t issued by the Federal government. Traditionally, it has been left to each individual State to decide what requirements (age, residency, blood test, etc.) should be followed.

“Let’s not make a Federal case of it” is a sentiment that should be applied more often than it is. Is there any chance that the Supreme Court will accept it on this very divisive issue?

I suspect the answer is no. I’m afraid that the same court that found a specious way to rule that Obamacare is Constitutional will declare that prohibiting gays from getting married is not, which means that the country is about to take another gigantic lurch to the left.

I hate to agree with Limbaugh on this. But, yes, I think it’s inevitable.

Until next time, keep some powder dry.

–Chip Wood

Chip Wood

is the geopolitical editor of PersonalLiberty.com. He is the founder of Soundview Publications, in Atlanta, where he was also the host of an award-winning radio talk show for many years. He was the publisher of several bestselling books, including Crisis Investing by Doug Casey, None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary Allen and Larry Abraham and The War on Gold by Anthony Sutton. Chip is well known on the investment conference circuit where he has served as Master of Ceremonies for FreedomFest, The New Orleans Investment Conference, Sovereign Society, and The Atlanta Investment Conference.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

  • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

    Whore hillary rodham clinton: “marriage between a man and a woman one of the founding, foundational institutions of history and humanity and civilization, and that its primary, principal role, during those millennia, has been the raising and socializing of children.”
    http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/03/27/hillary_clinton_harry_reid_when_democrats_swore_they_would_never_back_gay.html

    • Bob666

      Yo Baconator,

      “Whore hillary rodham Clinton”

      Better get use to President Hillary Rodham Clinton. You’re a twisted and miserable species and enjoy Russia and Putin.

      • Nadzieja Batki

        Bob666, actually you are the twisted and miserable of the species. Since when have you become the seer?

        • Karolyn

          I see nowhere near the venom coming from Alondra’s mouth coming from Bob’s. Actually, I feel sorry for her.

          • Ringgo1

            Save your sorrow for yourself. We have all seen way more of your ignorant posts here than are warranted. Why don’t you go to HuffPo where you will be welcome? Is your life so empty that you have to come here just to stir things up?

          • Karolyn

            Are you so narrow mined that you cannot stand to see words written that do not agree with what you believe?

          • JCfromDC

            Bob’s a “hater.” they grow like grapes on the “liberal” vine, too

          • Bob666

            Gee Steve,
            Actually I’m a libertarian. Would not know a “liberal vine” if I saw one.

          • Bob666

            Yo Karolyn,
            what did I do to you? What “venom” are you referring to? I have seen Alondra rip you a new one on several post and all of a sudden I am the bad guy? what gives?

          • Karolyn

            Bob you misread my post. I said that I don’t see the venom coming out of your mouth that comes out of Alondra’s.

          • Bob666

            OK, now that I read it again, I guess I can see that. Alondra really is a nasty pig-headed creature. I’m not sure that she is worth feeling sorry for.
            She is really is only one of two people that I have a problem with on the board, both quoting the bible as if they wrote it.

        • Bob666

          Yo Nads,
          proof? I don’t you Nads even if most of your comments are from another planet.

      • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

        I will NEVER support that power monger and she will NEVER be my president. She IS a whore to the power elites

      • Ringgo1

        Yo bub999,
        You are twisted and miserable, as well as STUPID. A single person is NOT a “species”.

        • Bob666

          Yo Ringgo,
          “You are twisted and miserable, as well as STUPID”

          Why thank you Rinngo, I might say the same about you, but I have not been acquainted with you yet. Do you always take shots at those you don’t know?
          As for Baconator, read her post, not sure what species she is, but it is not Human.
          As for Hillary, I am not citing my choice, I am citing reality, if you don’t agree that is fine, but there is not republican that will touch her if she runs.

    • http://twitter.com/jopawais john waisanen

      [slur deleted] Alondra I am not really sure where you came from but I think you may be some kind of anti-American Commie plant.

      • Nadzieja Batki

        Alondra is not,but you john waisanen may just be.

        • Ringgo1

          I think you’re right, Nadzieja.

    • Karolyn

      Some people grow and change. Others, similar to yourself, Alondra, stagnate and stay the same, keeping the same views, prejudices and hatreds throughout their lives.

      • Ringgo1

        Your post describes yourself.

        • Karolyn

          Quite the opposite, Ringgo. I hate no one and do not display such animosity to any person, ideology, view, nationality, sexual persuasion, etc. My view is “Live and live and let live.”

          • Ringgo1

            Hmmm…strange, considering your many posts here.

          • Deerinwater

            You find a post of Karolyn where she speaks of her hatred toward anyone. ~ and post in under this post ~ or put a sock in it about Karloyn’s hate.

          • Capitalist at Birth

            A lot of good that did the ancient Empires of Rome and Greece.

          • Jana

            Actually Karolyn, Alondra has something called STANDARDS. She has always stuck to her standards even against a lot of people on this thread. I admire her for it!

      • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

        Hypocrite, thy name is, lamebrained Karolyn.

        “You Can’t Fix Stupid. Stupid is FOR-EVER” – Ron White http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gxKStPXyn8)

        ENOUGH said.

  • Jeremy Leochner

    Marriage is based on consent and commitment. If a homosexual couple made up of two people of legal age who have genuine love for each other wish to get married I see no difference than if a heterosexual couple made up of two people of legal age who have genuine love for each other wish to get married. People should not be denied the ability to marry based on their sexual orientation. If it requires a federal mandate to ensure peoples ability to marry is not infringed on than so be it. I would hope the individual states would see the wisdom and do so themselves though. This is not an issue of left versus right. Its an issue of equality and acceptance. Homosexuality is not a threat to heterosexuality. It is not a threat to marriage or anyone or anything.

    • Warrior

      Why do you get so hung up on the number 2 and who defines “genuine love”? Tiger Woods did nothing wrong. He spread his love all over the place and all the places just loved him. Same for a few ex-prez’s. “Mandates” are for wusses. But you’re right about one thing. It’s not a left vs. right issue. Let me see now, that peg goes into that hole. That’s good little johnny, now take your pills.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Because Warrior. Plenty of people who speak out against gay marriage seem to think they can define genuine love. I am simply providing a counter argument.

    • theendisfar

      Government’s Just Power comes from the Consent of the Governed. As you put it, Consent must be given. There is a great argument over whether we have Majority Rule or the Rule of Law.

      Under Majority Rule the Dems and Repubs can pass ANY law into US Code including, but not limited to; Defining Marriage, Slavery, Income Tax, Social Security, MediCare, NDAA, Patriot Act, SOPA, ObamaCare, RepublicanCare, Federal Reserve Act, and the list goes on. Majority Rule is a Democracy, which the Founders despised for good reason.

      Under a Rule of Law only Laws that recognize Self Ownership and Property Rights may be passed (i.e. none of the Above).

      The Gov’t has NO BUSINESS recognizing, or not, consensual relationships between 2 adults be it romantic or business. Children may not consent (i.e. sign a contract, etc) to most things for obvious reasons. Child Rights are a bit trickier as Rights are actions/behaviors that do not require the permission of another to act. Parents, in effect, own and are responsible for their children.

      In any event, the Republic can whine and complain about Gay Marriage till the end of time, whilst ignoring the Federal Reserve and the $Trillions Congress has approved for special interest projects, under our Assumed Consent. The Feds know that as long as they can keep the Plebs irate at each other, they can continue to live like Kings and Vassals.

      Heterosexuals who think gay marriage will destroy marriage must have forgotten their Vows, or never took them in the first place. Men and Women, who are married, Lie, Cheat, Steal, Murder, etc. Why are they not being targeted as ‘destroying’ the sanctity of ‘marriage’? They’ve been doing it for Eons.

      A Federal Mandate is the worst idea. The idea is to get Gov’t OUT of our Lives, Federal Mandates are chains upon the people. We have 10’s of Thousands of restraints already.

      • Defend 2nd Amendment

        Keep in kind these laws are ALL MAN MADE & not like the laws of nature which no one can violate. So how about incest, based on the arguement by the gays & lesbos, it should be all right then.

        • Kenyan Krusher

          EXACTLY !!!! You are right…this Babble about civil rights is BS!!! If it really was a Universal Civil Rights issue, how can there be millions who have to be protected with conscience provisions???? Was not the case in the 60’s with blacks!! How come people who speak out about how homosexuality is a perverse satanic endeavor have to worry about being charged with a hate crime, but when they have their “Pride Parades” & show Jesus in bondage or Mary in a bikini, that is OK?

        • Dave

          Defend,
          Church law is “man-made”, the bible is “man-made”, the Koran is “man-made” You have no argument.

    • Defend 2nd Amendment

      There is nothing natural about gay marriage. If it were, this planet would be full of them is all apecies. No, absolutely not. This is nothing to be teaching the next generation – the same as teaching the young on how to become a drug user. It doesn’t hurt anyone else does it so it should be protected under the equal rights arguement.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Defend second amendment. The world does have numerous gay people. We just don’t know how many because many are afraid to be honest for of being condemned as deviant or unnatural. There are numerous states which have legalized homosexuality. Its already too late. And yet these states have not lost their morality. Homosexuality is not deviant or perverse. And as to your analogy of a drug user. You do realize homosexuality is not addictive. I am a heterosexual. Just because I see a homosexual couple kissing or hugging each other does not mean I wish to do that. Just because homosexuals are allowed to marry does not mean I am going to go and propose to my best bud. Homosexuality deserves protection under the law because it is not a bad thing.

    • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

      Jeremy you are right that real marriage is based on consent and committment. That is exactly why homesexuals should NOT be able to redefine marriage. Even when in a realtionship homosexuals, esp. men are not committed . http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=124251811&page=1 and I can site a lot more sources for THAT! STDs among that tiny population are rampant and in the above reference promiscuity is the reason why. STDs are less gender based and more the result of promiscuity. Ask any medical doctor.This behavior is aberant by definition and allowing children to think it’s ok is just plaing irresponsible.

    • Michael Edwards

      Low informed voter

      • Jeremy Leochner

        How am I low informed Michael?

    • Capitalist at Birth

      Ask the members of the ancient Empires of Rome and Greece what they think about that idea. Of course none are alive, but future societies decided that sexual promiscuity was a bad idea. And deviant sexual behavior should be, at least. discouraged.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        But Capitalist. How is homosexuality deviant sexual behavior. Oral and Anal Sex are practiced by numerous heterosexuals. If I am not mistaken the Kama Sutra was intended for heterosexuals. I can imagine that at least a few of the things in that book would be considered “deviant”. If we are going to discuss the morality of sexuality the fact is that homosexuality and heterosexuality are no better and no worse than each other. A man and a man or a man and a woman. It does not matter. If we discuss things like Pedophilia or Beastiality or Adultery or things like that. Yes those are deviant sexual behavior. But those things are in a whole different ball park. Heck they are on a whole different planet from homosexuality.

  • Harold Olsen

    Homosexuals are not just content with getting same sex marriage legalized. They want other perversions legalized as well. Last year, here in Washington state, voters legalized same sex marriage. Just before the election, one gay rights group put out a statement saying that once they get that legalized they’d work on legalizing pedophilia. On their web site, a local ABC affiliate ran an article in support of it. I criticized it and even called them perverts for supporting having sex with children. I got booted off and am now barred from their web site. Apparently, they got a lot of complaints about the article because they removed it and deny ever having posted it.

    • Karolyn

      You can no more generalize homosexuals than you can generalize heteros.

      • Ringgo1

        Why not? YOU generalize quite a bit.

      • Newspooner

        A General once told me, “No generalization is worth a damn, including this one”.

      • Capitalist at Birth

        Karolyn, Homosexual behavior is abnormal sexual behavior. As are other types of aberrant sexual behaviors. Society has the right to regulate and decide what types of behavior will be allowed. I prefer to live in a society that does not promote and accept abnormal sexual behavior. You can move to a country that allows these types of behavior if you so choose. Nothing personal Just the facts.

        • TheSilverRanger

          If you truly believe what you’re saying, then you are not a capitalist. You are nothing more than a facist parasite who want to control people’s behavior just because you don’t believe in or agree with it. Parasites like you make nothing for yourself; what you cannot plagiarize you seek to censor. What you cannot regulate, you seek to ban. You claim to be a capitalist, judging by your user name, but you are no better than the behavior controlists of the world; the Pol Pots of the world. You are a PARASITE.

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            WOW, What a Libtardic talking point.

            The most “loving” and “tolerant” minority group is offended by the TRUTH: HOMOSEXUALITY is a Mental SICKNESS/DISORDER aka Psychological PATHOLOGY, which leads to the ABNORMAL,
            UNNATURAL, and ANOMALOUS sexual behavior/conduct, appearance, thoughts and emotions.

            Here is the REAL FACT: The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) published by the American Psychiatric Association provides standard criteria for the classification of mental disorders. And Homosexuality was included in the list of the Mental Disorders alongside with the Pedophilia, Necrophilia, Bestiality/ Zoophilia, Paraphilia or any other –Philia.

            But in 1970, the PERVERTS and DEBAUCHED, led by radical activists like Frank Kameny, began a PROGRAM OF INTIMIDATION aimed at the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and attacking
            many psychiatrists publicly with the goal to remove Homosexuality from the List of the Mental Disorders (DSM).

            “…what happened in 1973…referring to the widespread protests by the gay and lesbian community that led to the APA’s dropping homosexuality from the DSM” as a Mental Disorder. (The Advocate, 12-28-93, p.40)

            Under extremely forceful political pressure the APA’s board of trustees finally CAVED into the demands of Homosexual activists and declared that Homosexuality is “no longer” Mental Disorder.

            But does it really means that Homosexuality is not Psychological PATHOLOGY/ Mental Disorder aka Mental PERVERSION and Sexual DEPRAVITY?

            No, it does NOT. Homosexuality WAS, IS and ALWAYS will be Mental Disorder, because EVERYTHING that is UNNATURAL and ABNORMAL is a DISORDER and should be treated as such. And
            there are many Health and Mental health professionals who maintain that HOMOSEXUALITY is a Mental Disorder.

            Here is the NON-Christian view on the Homo Behavior, but the
            view from the Law of NATURE aka NATURAL Law:

            “The PLEASURE IS TO BE NATURAL that arises out of the INTERCOURSE BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN; but that the
            INTERCOURSE OF MEN WITH MEN, or of women with women, IS CONTRARY TO NATURE, which was originally due to UNCONTROLLED LUST.” – Plato (Plato’s dialogues “Laws”)

            “The male-female sex causes PLEASURE BY NATURE, while same-sex sex is ‘UNNATURAL’.” – Plato (Plato’s dialogues “Laws”)

            Plato is the world’s most influential Philosopher, who is taught in
            ALL Universities at the Faculty of Philosophy.

            In his “Republic” Plato gave his definition of the ‘IDEAL COMMUNITY’: “…a city which would be established IN ACCORDANCE with NATURE.”

            Another famous NON-Christian Philosopher Cicero [106 BC – 43
            BC, a Roman philosopher, statesman, lawyer, orator, political theorist, constitutionalist and consul], wrote in his “De Legibus” that both – JUSTICE and LAW – should derive their origin FROM what NATURE has given to man and what NATURAL Law obliges the human society to embrace.(Cicero, “De Legibus”, Book 1)

            The jurisprudence of the Roman Empire was rooted in Cicero’s laws, which were based on the Law of NATURE.

            And I am going to finish by the Dr. Carson’s statement at the National Prayer Breakfast:

            “Why is it so important that we educate our people? Because we don’t want to go down the pathway as so many pinnacle nations that have preceded us. I think particularly about ancient Rome. Very powerful. Nobody could even challenge them militarily, but what happened to them? THEY DESTROYED THEMSELVES from
            within. MORAL DECAY, FISCAL IRRESPONSIBILITY. They destroyed themselves.”

            ENOUGH SAID!

            P.S. The Perverts tried too hard to find the “gay gene(s)”, but they failed, because the “Homo” gene(s) does NOT exist. God did NOT include it in DNA.

            HOMOSEXUALITY is a Mental PERVERSION which leads to the Sexual DEPRAVITY!!! It is a DETESTABLE, REPUGNANT, DISGUSTING and REVOLTING act/life style.

            TSR, spread the TRUTH: “Great is TRUTH, and mighty above all things.” (2Ezdra 4:41)

            Stop to worship to Satan, STOP to LIE.

          • Bob666

            Yo “America’s Other White meat”

            From:

            http://www.psychiatry.org/mental-health/people/lgbt-sexual-orientation

            Is Homosexuality A Mental Disorder?
            No. All major professional mental health organizations have gone on record to affirm that homosexuality is not a mental disorder. In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association’s Board of Trustees removed homosexuality from its official diagnostic manual, The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Second Edition (DSM II). The action was taken following a review of the scientific literature and consultation with experts in the field. The experts found that homosexuality does not meet the criteria to be considered a mental illness.

            Its very unfortunate that you like to spread lies to make up an out dated agenda that ranks you up there with pond scum and single cell organisms. Perhaps I have given you too much credit from an evolutional point of view.

    • Doc Sarvis

      Please provide links to your claims.

      • Kenyan Krusher

        It does not matter if Harold Olsen can site proof, Doc, it is inevitable…the genie is out of the bottle & like the old canard says: “If you don’t believe in God, you’ll believe in anything”….It’s already happening in Europe & Scandanavia….where 3 people can get hitched, & there is a move to allow bestiality…as Bill O’Reilly has said, “If it is a just about Love & Commitment, why shouldn’t a person be able to marry their dog or horse?”

        • Karolyn

          If you cant recognize the irrationality in O’Reilly’s remark, there is something seriously wrong.

          • Capitalist at Birth

            Says who?

          • Kenyan Krusher

            O’Reilly was making a cogent point…this is a very slippery slope we are entering into…..After this , all the Barricades are Broken, how can you deny 3 or 4 or more people from marrying, it is inevitable…..so, in the future you will see signs like, “I LOVE MY 3 DADS & 2 MOMS”

          • Doc Sarvis

            Ah the slippery slope argument. The slippery slope argument was used when slavery was ended, when women got the vote, when inter-racial marriage was allowed, so on and so on and so on. I think we know how to handle a slippery slope and it is NOT to fear it or let others stoke up fear of doing the right thing.

        • Doc Sarvis

          The main reason is that there is no way for a dog or horse to verify consent.
          Bill O’Reilly also thinks there is a war on Christmas. HA!
          And by the way, most of the homosexuals I know do believe in God.

          • Kenyan Krusher

            They may believe in God, or so they say, but they are severely violating His/Her Laws!!! & you know what else…deep down they know it!!

          • Doc Sarvis

            That’s what YOU think.

      • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

        “The Guardian has become Britain’s newest champion for a minority of sorts. In a January 3 article, the UK paper has taken up the cause of pedophiles who claim they are just “ordinary members of society” that only need a little understanding.”
        http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2013/01/06/uk-guardian-pedophiles-need-support/

        How do you think: WHY the pervert Kenyan pushes the sex education BEGINNING IN KINDERGARTEN (5 years old)?

        Sex “education” is used for sex “indoctrination.”

        Soon the pedophilia will be just another sexual orientation.

      • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

        The SB48 is just the latest California law “mandating the homosexual-bisexual-transsexual agenda – as well as heterosexual fornication – in every government school in California without exceptions, and without parental exemption.”

        SB48 was pushed through the DEMONcrat-controlled state legislature.

        SB48 demands that students in public schools every year honor Harvey Milk, a homosexual activist and reported sexual predator.

        In honoring Milk, schools are advocating for the acceptance of what Milk sought: the entire homosexual, bisexual and cross-dressing agenda; a refusal to acknowledge sexually transmitted diseases spread by the behavior; his behavior as “a sexual predator of teenage boys, most of them runaways with drug problems”; advocacy for multiple sexual relationships at one time…

    • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

      Harold, you are right.
      Soon the pedophilia will be just another sexual orientation.

      “…the United Nations has been promoting the SEXUAL RIGHTS TO YOUTH. Last year at the United Nations Youth Conference in New York they unveiled their Y-PEER initiative that wanted to give sexual rights to youth. They didn’t exactly define what ages they were referring to, but other UN references indicate ages as young as 10 years old and possibly younger.”
      http://godfatherpolitics.com/9374/9-year-old-gives-birth-acceptable-under-u-n-policies/

    • TheSilverRanger

      Gay marriage is one thing, but pedophilia is the worst thing of all, and you cannot compare the two; you’re comparing apples and handgrenades. Pedophilia is the most disgusting crime ever to have graced the earth, and any pedophile caught molesting or raping a child should never be allowed back on the streets. Though while I agree what ABC did was wrong, and you are entitled to your opinion, I must disagree with you that homosexuality is a perversion. If a man falls in love with another man and wants to spend the rest of his life with that one man, then he should be allowed to. Just be grateful that the gay community isn’t forcing any churches of christian or catholic faith to marry a gay couple. It is not the governments’ place to enforce civil laws onto religious leaders; we are guarenteed freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.

  • Warrior

    51 repub senators who are still in office? Am I missing something here? Anyway, I’m more focussed on the “divorce” aspect of “all” relationships like the one I’m currently having with “progressive elected” rulers er, officials. Them and I just can’t seem to get on the same “page” on any issue. I mean really, they try and tell me how to live my life, they spend my money, they monitor my whereabouts, they continually try to screw me. All the same attributes of “marriage”. I think I may have a case to take to the “supremes”. Anyone else want to join in? We can start a “class”.

  • Bob666

    OK, Why would anyone deny two people the who love each other and treat each other with respect the right afforded to 93% of the rest of Americans. Most corporations have figured out that providing benefits to same sex spouses helps retain good employees.
    If they treat each other well, then it would be a healthier relationship that 50% of the heterosexual couples out there. These people exist and restricting their rights will not make them go away. when the relationship goes south, let them enjoy marital bliss just like the rest of us.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      Since when did human predators become two people who love each other? Playing at semantics will not change reality.

      • Karolyn

        “Human predators?” You’re reaching, Nadzieja. I am sure the ratio of hetero predators and homosexual predators is the same. Homosexuality does not equal predation.

        • Capitalist at Birth

          I have known close to 100 homosexual men. Every one of them was molested by an older male, usually a family member or friend, during their early teen years. They in turn become pedophiles themselves. Once, again their are many studies on this subject that you can find on your own.

          • Doc Sarvis

            Then you associate with a pretty rotten set of folks.
            I call this B.S.

          • Doc Sarvis

            that is for Capitalist at Birth.

          • Capitalist at Birth

            I did not say I associate with them. I did have quite a few conversations with them, in which we explored their rationale for their behavior. You can take it as B.S. should you so choose. I stated that their are many studies on this subject that I am sure are still available. I have read at least 50 books on Psychology and have studied the subject in depth. If you would like to produce a factual study refuting my contentions, that was not performed by a homosexual, I would be willing to listen. Until then my anecdotal evidence remains intact, as many of these conversations were done as a part of my Psychology classes. Many were done as just a part of human interest with employees, fellow workers, and friends of friends. I would never associate with a sexual deviant.

          • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

            Some sense in a sea of B.S. Here’s an individual who has experience and information to share and only asking others to do the same. It’s petty 2 year old behavior to twist this into something it’s not. Put your facts out there for all to see and discuss, if you have any. The preponderence of the literature will impress anyone who isn’t caught up their self serving tantrums. Thank you, Capitalist!

        • krc

          I agree with Marilyn. I have many gay friends who are committed and hard working people. I have never heard hateful comments from them like I’ve read on this site.

      • Doc Sarvis

        “… two people the who love each other” does not constitute “human predators”.

    • Defend 2nd Amendment

      Because, as in nature, gays & lesbos can’t procreate. Nothing is gained when you degrade moriality. Equal rights? Why would a moral society want to promote something that is unnatural!

      • Karolyn

        It is natural to them. Why does it bother you so much?

        • Defend 2nd Amendment

          Degrading morality.

          • Doc Sarvis

            It is degrading the morality of consenting, loving, homosexuals to deny them the status of being married.

        • Capitalist at Birth

          Refer to the ancient Empires of Greece and Rome for what happens to a promiscuous society.

        • Kenyan Krusher

          Yeah & to some, murder & bank robbery & rape seems natural , too!! & to some sodomizing a 10 year old seems natural, too!! WAKE UP & realize not all things change for the better!!

        • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

          It is NOT natural and the numbers prove it. That behavior is nearly 3 standard deviations from the norm. The word DEVIATION is used in the purest sense. Homosexuals can and will DO what they want. Just don’t try to force the rest of us to agree or participate with you.

          • Karolyn

            They’re not essentially asking for agreement or participation. Of course, they would like people to understand; but they don’t NEED your acceptance – just the benefits that come from marriage. To them, it is their natural way of being. I often wonder how many good Christian men and women are homosexual but stay in the closet because of their beliefs. They are probably the most vociferous opponents of homosexuality.

          • Doc Sarvis

            That depends on how you define “natural”. Also, I’d be careful applying statistics here. At what standard deviation point IS what you call “natural” because a lot of sexual positions and/or sex aids are very much in the margins. If you want the government determining at what standard deviation a sex practice is approved or not approved you are asking for trouble.

      • Doc Sarvis

        How is love between two consenting adults unnatural???

        • Defend 2nd Amendment

          Where are all the gays in the animal kingdom? Incest should be legal then using your arguement.

          • Doc Sarvis

            I have always said marriage should be allowed between two consenting adults.

          • dave

            Defend,

            http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

            Proof of homosexuality abounds in the animal kingdom. You just refuse to acknowledge it. Dolphins, birds, monkey’s
            Ignorance is no place to base a law.

          • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

            There are some examples of it but they don’t ask to get married or raise children do they? Homosexual animals are NEVER pride, pack or gaggle leaders and if they tried to be so would either be killed outright or driven off by the leader. Also, they are no more promiscious than the average bear…….. . Read a book entitled, “Inside the Animal Mind”. You will come away with a different understanding.

          • Dave

            Should infertle couple be allowed to marry then under your narrow definition when your assertions backed up by nothing put you in a corner?
            You have no idea what you are talking about.
            Why can’t you just let people live there life? You are you to be judge and jury? I am for freedom and equality… Its conservatives are not.

        • GRusling

          “LOVE” has nothing to do with homosexual relations. I “LOVE” my Brothers and would die to protect them, but we do not engage in weird sexual activities! I have male friends that I dearly love but once again, we do not engage in strange sex games.

          MORALITY requires me to refrain from having “sex” with my Sister-in-law, even though I find her highly attractive. The animal urge is certainly there but I control my emotional response because I know it would be WRONG!

          This is what’s wrong with the new concept of “same-sex marriage”. It’s morally wrong, and everyone knows it, so those who wish to engage in it anyway try to create some “LAW” to force it on those of us who recognize it for what it is.

          There is no “law” on the books making heterosexual marriage legal. It’s a natural law, not mans law, and any law made by man is secondary and of no real consequence in the long term…

          • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

            Good post, George! Keep the faith!

          • Karolyn

            It is morally wrong for you but not for those who “God” made that way; and “God” doesn’t make mistakes.

          • Karolyn

            George, Why do you people only think in terms of sex and not in terms of two people emotionally and spiritually loving each other? This preoccupation with sex is troubling! :-)

        • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

          Because that “Love” is often targeted upon very young family memberS.

      • Flashy

        So people past child bearing age shouldn’t be allowed to marry?

        • GRusling

          Why does there need to be a law? Homosexuals can marry right now, anywhere in the world, if they want to. All they need is to arrange for whatever ceremony suits their purpose and get with it! If they can find a Preacher who agrees, he can conduct the ceremony in his Church and no “LAW” is in place to prevent it.

          Homosexuals are shooting themselves in the foot.They demand a “RIGHT” to marry. That’s a right which no one else in the world has, and ultimately they will learn they are their own worst enemies…

          • Karolyn

            The problem, George, is that they cannot have the same rights as hetero married couples have. Think Social security, health benefits, being next of kin in medical situation, etc.

    • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

      93%? Where do you get that number? The number of gay people is less than 2%. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/07/gay-population-us-estimate_n_846348.html This issue should not even be on the radar of the REAL business the government should be working on. I can site many more references. This “issue” is sheer madness!

      • Bob666

        I believe it was Rasmmussen, but I can say for sure. I came across this number after the last election from a couple of different sources. The number that I have read are between 4% & 8%.

      • Bob666

        From Gallop:

        What Percentage of the Population Is Gay?

        by Jennifer Robison, Contributing Editor

        In his 1948 book, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, Alfred Kinsey shocked the world by announcing that 10% of the male population is gay. A 1993 Janus Report estimated that nine percent of men and five percent of women had more than “occasional” homosexual relationships. The 2000 U.S. Census Bureau found that homosexual couples constitute less than 1% of American households. The Family Research Report says “around 2-3% of men, and 2% of women, are homosexual or bisexual.” The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force estimates three to eight percent of both sexes. So who’s right — what percentage of the population is homosexual?

        It may be that no one will ever know for sure. To some people, homosexuality is a matter of perception and definition. Furthermore, many people have trouble admitting their homosexuality to themselves, much less to a researcher. But when Gallup asked Americans for their best estimate of the American gay and lesbian population, the results made all the figures mentioned above look conservative.

        Every Fifth Person — at Least

        In August 2002*, Gallup asked Americans, in an open-ended format, to estimate the percentage of American men and the percentage of American women who are homosexual. The average estimates were that 21% of men are gay and 22% of women are lesbians. In fact, roughly a quarter of the public thinks more than 25% of men and 25% of women are homosexual. It should be pointed out, too, that many Americans (at least one in six) could not give an estimate.

        Male respondents tend to give lower estimates of both the male and female homosexual population than female respondents do. The average estimates among male respondents are that 16% of men and 21% of women are homosexual. Among female respondents, the average estimates are that 26% of men and 23% of women are homosexual. Somewhat interestingly, both sexes believe there are more homosexuals in the opposite sex than in their own sex.

        Portrayals in Pop Culture

        Before the 1980s, the few representations of homosexuality in popular culture tended to consist of potentially dangerous social deviants (think Norman Bates in Psycho). Since then, however, the portrayal of gay characters in pop culture have become far more numerous and mostly positive. That growing representation may have spurred growing acceptance — and inflated population estimates. In the last 10 years, the number of Americans saying they feel homosexuality should be considered an acceptable alternative lifestyle has gone from 38% (June 1992) to 51% (May 2002).

        “Seeing ourselves reflected positively encourages gay people to come out,” said Cathy Renna, news media director for the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD). “And when people know real gay men and lesbians it increases their level of understanding and acceptance.” If you doubt that Ellen, Rosie and others have had an effect on Americans’ acceptance of homosexuality, consider this — MTV and Showtime are about to launch a cable channel directed at the homosexual market. They estimate that gays and lesbians make up 6.5% of television’s audience.

        Key Points

        Whether increased acceptance of homosexuality has led to an upsurge in the number of positive media portrayals of gay characters or vice versa, one result seems to be that Americans now tend to overestimate the gay population in America. While most expert estimates place America’s homosexual population at 10% or less, Americans tend to guess that the number is higher, around 20%.

        *Results based on telephone interviews with 489 (for those estimating percentages of lesbian women) and 518 (for those estimating percentages of gay men) conducted May 6-9, 2002. For results based on the total sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±5%.

    • Capitalist at Birth

      Do you have any proof of that contention. I have read studies on this subject that indicate that homosexuals are more promiscuous than heterosexuals, which leads to a higher rate of relationship failures, whether they are married or not. I cannot provide you with references. You should be able to find these studies on your own if you are interested in the facts.

      • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

        Great poiint! Just google the subject and the numbers are there! We are being blindly led down a path to oblivion by the media if we don’t take responsibility for understanding this whole picture. Perhaps the thing the Founders of this American Nation feared the most was an uneducated electoret.

      • Karolyn

        I wasn’t aware the debate was on promiscuity. Take a look at the booming porn and prostitution business. Personally, I don’t believe that men were built for monogamy.

        • WTS/JAY

          Karolyn, it takes “two” to tango…

    • GRusling

      “Most corporations have figured out that providing benefits to same sex spouses helps retain good employees.”

      You can’t support that contention. “MOST” corporations refuse to even address the issue, and that’s as it should be. “MANY” corporations certainly do as you say, but that’s a long, long way from “MOST.”

      With the exception of a few “English Speaking” countries, this subject never even comes up. It’s certainly not a “topic” in any country where the dominant religion is Islam, so forget your blather about “MOST” corporations…

      • Bob666

        OK George,

        poor choice, many would be a better term. Bottom line is; MANY corporations are providing the same benefits to same sex spouses.

        “so forget your blather about “MOST” corporations”
        did someone take a dump in you chereos this morning?

  • jimmie smith

    I’m pretty sure the writers of the constitution did not fathom same sex marriage. However they did understand a unknown civil right, hence the ninth amendment followed by the tenth. It all makes perfect sense, a states issue?

    • KG

      Umm… in their day, there was something known as a “Boston Marriage” where it was usually two women who were usually spinsters who would live together. And remember, a lot of our Patriot Founding Fathers were sailors. And we ALL know what they do when its a dark, lonely night out at sea!

  • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

    The very liberally “stacked” supreme court is now running the risk of becoming irrelevant in the minds of many people. With their “support” of the obviously unconstitutuinal Obamacare (and I use the word “care” very lightly) they have over reached their authority, like too much of the federal government is doing in these turbulent times. The Constitution is VERY CLEAR and only gives specific powers to the feds while the people retain the vast majority. Chip is right, they could not have imagined this possibility as it was beyond their comprehension. It’s also beyond that of many today. How can less than 2% of the population force their lifestyles on the rest of us? We have way more pressing business to work on than this nonsense. The media has blown it all out of proportion (to make money) and politicians have jumped on board to score points because it make them look like they’re doing somethiing when, in fact, they are trying to tackle an issue that is really immoral and meaningleess in the bigger picture. They don’t have time to work on a budget, address our impending bankrupcy, ask why the DHS needs billions of rounds of ammunition, or deal with border security but can address homosexual unions, most of whjich will dissolve in short order, anyway. Washington appears to have NO WAY of setting priorities on the business of the nation. THIS issue is not one of them. and is getting way too much disgusting press.

    • Don McLaughlin

      “we” lost this issue near the beginning, when legal partnerships with the same state and Federal legal rights …. was blocked by those who feel they just must mess in other human,s business. Under that legal equality ( really hard to come up with an honest or constitutional reason to deny “equal treatment under the law” …) Marriage should be left to the Churches (not the State … which has no business in religious affairs) and they marry whom ever their God permits…
      Had we all admitted at the beginning that equal application of law is the essance, marriage would not need re-definition… Hoist on our own…

    • -Disabled American Patriot-

      When Hitlery Clinton was trying hard to get votes for the ’08 election.
      She almost stated plainly the she was gay.

    • Flashy

      “How can less than 2% of the population force their lifestyles on the rest of us?”

      good question. What is being forced upon you? From what i see, a minority of religious fanatics referring to themselves as ‘christians’ are trying to force their beliefs on everyone else. Is that what you refer to?

      if so, i agree. Darn good thing we have a Constitution that prohibits religious mores to be practiced or approved of by government sanction. The American Taliban is a danger we should all watch and be leery such having ANY say in affairs of State.

  • Flashy

    Twp people are married in a state that same sex marriage is legal. They move to a state where it is not. Are they married, with all the Rights, benefits, obligations and responsibilties of marriage, in the state they move to?

    Article IV of the US Constitution begins …”Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State…”

    That is the issue before the Court. Whether it is decided in the recent cases or whether the Court succeeds in evading the direct question, such is what the base argument is. And sooner or later, that is what the Court will need to decide. Can a contract, legally entered in one state between two people, be enforced in another?

    Under International Shoe, dealing with Commerce, the Court said “yes”. Does the Full Faith and Credit also apply to marriage? Between two people of separate sexes, it has never been asked…the question has always been what state law applies (ans: the state where the marriage was entered).

    Do we now say there is exception to the Full Faith and Credit Clause? What are those exceptions? When concerning a state law, it is not a religious act..it is a licensing act. One can be married without religious ceremony….get a judge. Thus…religious beliefs have nothing to do with a state licensing act. Using religious belief controlling as a license act of a government body is without doubt unConstitutional.

    Far more to this than the extremists would want you to believe…

    • GRusling

      When one State says something is illegal, and the State next door says it is legal, how is the “full faith and credit” wording reconciled? Is each State then required to adopt the position of the other? That would seem to be necessary per YOUR interpretation of what that line means. That’s not only senseless, it’s totally unworkable.

      The State of Texas, for instance, declares that any “contract” signed in Texas is subject to the laws of Texas, no matter what that contract may say to the contrary. All rights of a citizen of Texas remain intact, no matter some “contract provision” which says that contract will be interpreted according to the laws of (for instance) New York. Texas is highly protective of consumer rights, and many large companies have learned to their sorrow that certain contract provisions and/or restrictions are a waste of time and effort when applied to a Texas resident. In a Texas court such provisions are unenforceable, while a ruling by a New York court, to the contrary, is invalid in Texas because it violates Texas law.

      Never before in the history of the world has “homosexual marriage” EVER been a concept presented as even existing, much less legally binding on the general population for any purpose. The societal reasons for marriage have nothing to do with religion, although religion certainly endorses it for it’s own purpose. The social reason for marriage is to perpetuate the race, stabilize society and maintain property rights. Eons of tradition tell us what it is, but now a small minority has decided to redefine the word to suite their agenda. They create confusion for the moment, but that will also pass, and reason will overcome the twisted logic they attempt to present…

      • Flashy

        First: Article IV provides that the various states must recognize legislative acts, public records, and judicial decisions of the other states. Now, if Texas had a law saying guns required a warning label and the manufacturer is liable to be fined if the gun has a warning label. Bubba..who lives in Michigan, buys a gun with a warning label. Moves to Texas. Can Texas now fine the manufacturer? Of course not. The manufacturer didn’t sell a mislabeled gun in Texas. bubba did not buy the gun in Texas. So what law applies? Where the manufactuer is? Michigan? Texas? The law in Michigan is for the protection of its residents…so there is a very thin connection to Bubba because Bubba moved. The manufacturer has no expectation of falling under the laws of texas, doesn’t sell guns in texas.

        How about divorce? Couple is married in Texas which says ‘no divorce for wife beating”. They move to Oregon. They get divorced because he beats his wife. He relocates back to Texas and reestablishes residency (she stays in Oregon). Is he still married ?

        A guy lives in Houston working for NASA. Texas has a law stating no interracial marriages. He is transferred to Cape Canaveral which has no law banning interracial marriage. He falls in love and marries a … Chinese woman. They have kids. A few years go by, NASA transfers him back to Houston. OK…are they still married? Are the kids now bastards? Are the liable to be punished for violating Texas law even though they had been legally married?

        I borrow $10,000 from you. Don’t pay it back. you sue and obtain a judgment. I move out of state. Are you suggesting you cannot go after me and collect on that judgment?

    • Jazzabelle

      But, by definition, it is federal agencies who apply for marriage licences. The Constitution was written to control the government, so the whole thing HAS to bind them.

      Of course, it has ALWAYS been lawful for natural persons to marry whomever they want. The government is bound to recognize it, with or without a license. It’s a contractual issue.

      That’s why Congress had to negotiate up-front with Utah when it wanted to become a State, instead of just banning polygamy on the federal level.

      The only Constitutional way to solve this issue is to get ALL government–states and feds alike–out of the marriage-regulating business.

    • -Disabled American Patriot-

      Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.

      The latter part “Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved” Only means congress

      decides what kind of legal document will work. In the case of Marriage check
      with your state, it only provides you with a document that is legal in your state, so any other state can at its own discretion accept or deny its validity.

  • boyscout

    Making a Federal case of it is precisely what vote pandering politicians of all stripes do (usually as part and parcel of a smoke and mirror tactic to disguise ulterior projects.) This foolish non issue could have easily been avoided by simply adjusting terminology thus permitting equal access to tax benefits etc. While Americans argue over trivia, The Monsanto protection rider slides through, anti gun deals go down, and the governmental revolving door circle jerk back scratching continues unabated. Perhaps next we should concentrate on the catastrophic lead paint situation in the congressional rest facilities.

  • May,

    Marriage cannot be defined by government at any level. This is in tbem realm of Gods jurisdiction and all www ays has been. I could care less about how they are taxed, None of us shoild be taxed on income anyway. The corruption of Gods institutions always occurs when men stick their grubby oaws where they shouldn’t.

  • Doc Sarvis

    Rush L. is the LAST person I would listen to pontificate about traditional marriage.

  • FreedomFighter

    Marriage was defined in ancient times thousands of years ago, and who can get married defined then: man and women.

    IF gay marriage is against your church belief system:

    Will government force Catholic priests to marry gays?
    Will government force Islamic clerics to marry gays?
    Will government force XYZ church to marry gays?

    Government has the right to give equal status, equal protections to a cival union, thats fine, but to force the church to perform what they know is a sin…is a sin and against the constitution.

    Laus Deo
    Semper FI

    • Karolyn

      Rather stupid presumption.
      In one short word, the answer to your questions is “NO!” The government will most certainly not force different religions to marry gays. If gays want to be married by a preacher, they have to find one who believes in it.

      • FreedomFighter

        Oh but they will.

        • GALT

          Why? The only issue really at stake here….are legal ones,
          and these would include simply establishing an equivilancy
          of whatever “legal rights” that apply to a “spouse” in a
          state sanctioned “marriage”……..be extended to any couple,
          regardless of sex, if they so choose to voluntarily enter
          into such a “binding contract”.

          The rest is just words and ignorance……and that will
          sort it self out over time……and the IGNORANT DIE!

          All good things take time…….

    • Dave

      You have no business having “freeedom” in your name dude. You obviously do not understand the concept. There are other religions that can marry same-sex couple or simply go to the justice of the peace. And they should. Its NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!
      Churches know nothing… the bible ok’s slavery… I am not ggoing to take their word on right and wrong. I will stand with the ideals of freedom and not with Catholic prients or Muslim Clerics thank you very much.

      • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

        This so much BS. It IS my business when the schools try to tell kids that gay behavior is ok and must be respected. It becomes my business when less than 2% of the population try to tell me their sexual preferences and their rights are the (new) norm. They are simnply not by defination. This is not a civil rights issue. It’s a money making issue for the media and they could care less about how right or wrong it is. It keeps people stirred and in the news so they can sell media. Go sell sell NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS somewhere else.

        • Dave

          Describe the “threat” of homosexuality on your kids… while you are at it, favor us with tales of you being a victim of homosexualty please…
          It very much IS a Civil rights issue. If you do not get the same tax benefits as heterosexual couples, its Civil rights… If you do not get the same medical access as heterosexual couples, its civil rights…
          I feel sorry for your kids because you will pass on the bigotry that you learned. Homosexuality is not wrong or right. It just IS. But you label them as lesser human beings because of ignorant religious dogma that also excuses slavery, or you must give up a certain food to get into “heaven”
          Please…This is America, not the United Christian States of America… even though the state of NC is currently trying to get rid of the 1st Amendment.

          • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

            My kids are none of your business and I stated in very simple terms a few of the victimizations above. I don’t want them to be taught homosexual behaviors because that legitimizes it as a mainstream norm which it is simply not.You seem to be stuck on the tax & medical BENEFITS things. See above. So, it’s NOT a civil rights issue it’s a special interest pushing their wants on the rest of us. You seem to have a problem with Christianity being pushed on you and I don’t like that any more than I like gay lifestyles pushed on me. I do not push religious dogma so your bigotry comment does not apply. You really just seem to be an angry person. It’s on medical & common sense grounds that I oppose homosexual marriage. This is certainly NOT the United GAY States of America, either. The first Ammendment must be used with responsibility like any other right. You don’t get to cry, “FIRE!” in a crowded theater and less than 2% of the population doesn’t get to set policy for the rest of the country.

          • Dave

            Prove your BS assertion Sharon. When did you decide to be heterosexual? I can tell you I have always known I was heterosexual. Did you have a “pros and cons” sheet going in HS?
            You have nothing but your prejudice as a guide.

          • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

            Lets look objectively. Either you choose to be gay, you are genetically predetermined to be gay, there are hormonnal imbalances or there are developmental reasons for being gay. You could put straight in place of gay in that sentence and it would equally apply.

            “Attempts to find a “gay gene” have never identified any gene or gene product that is actually associated with homosexual orientation, with studies failing to confirm early suggestions of linkage of homosexuality to region Xq28 on the X chromosome. The question of genetic influences on sexual orientation has been recently examined using DNA microarray technology, although, the results have largely failed to pinpoint specific genes as a factor in sexual orientation.” So we’ve looked pretty darn hard.

            “Early childhood abuse has been associated with homosexuality, but, at most, only explains about 10% of those who express a homosexual orientation.” It’s higher in men and lower in women. I don’t remember about the statistical significance test.

            “Studies involving a rare hormonal imbalance, congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), caused by defective 21-hydroxylase enzyme, suggest that hormonal abnormalities can influence sexual orientation.” This simply means that there are treatments for homosexuals. This particular one mainly affects female homosexuals.

            “The fact that sexual orientation is not constant for many individuals, but can change over time suggests that at least part of sexual orientation is actually sexual preference.” I have seen this with my own eyes more than once

            http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/genetics_of_homosexuality.html

            I can go on like this all day and site more references than most care to read but the point is, lets stop spending resources we don’t have on such a tiny minority of the population. Homosexuals are being used as pawns by power brokers to get more power and I don’t like it. Stop the madness and FOCUS on real issues.

          • Dave

            Funny Sharon, I always knew I was heterosexual from day one and my homosexual friends knew they were homosexual. It is only pressure from society that comes from people like you that try and force people to be what you think they should be. If you remember your biology class, there is a certain % that is the dominant gene (100% heterosexuality) the majority ( that have both hetero and homo traits but show hetero) and a % that is 100% homosexual. The % of both 100% groups is about 10%. Your psuedoscience is no justification from prohibit two of age people from entering into a legal contract.
            The animal piece about never being able to lead their group or family was hilarious. So what you said is if you don’t achieve a leadership position in your life, you should not have the right to marry. That is essentially your position.
            Same sex marriage does not harm you, your children, or society… But your bigotry does.

        • Dave

          Tell me all about the threat to your children. How about the time when you were “victimized” by homosexuality?
          It very much is a civil rights issue when you do not get the same tax benefits or medical access as heterosexual couples.
          Where does your belief that homosexuality is awful thing come from? Why do heterosexual couples keep having homosexual children?

          • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

            They do not keep having homosexual children. There is a large body of evidence to suggest that homesexual behavior is predominately learned (I’ve already posted references) and raising children in that kind of environment will help impressionable minds learn it more, The Federal government funds schools with tax money so that’s one more reason it’s my business. Your medical benefits point don’t apply, Obozocare will see to that. Besides, if they work they already have access to the same medical care as everyone else. While I at it, I’m being victimized daily by watching Gay Pride marches with men wearing fishnet “clothes”, watching money be absolutely wasted on a tiny minority of loud mouths, & by leaders attentions being focused on dealing with this nonsense instead of more pressing business. Too much is being focused on too small a population that are aberant. The gay population is being used by the media and politicians and it needs to stop. The homosexuaal population is way more prone to STDs because of the behavior of the vast majority (already posted those references, too). Do I need to enumerate them for you? I can.Whose civil rights are being violated, anyway? Civil unions are fine but don’t dare call it marriage because it isn’t. This tiny minority wants special consideration and scream bloody murder when they can’t have it. Take your civil “rights” position and shove it.

          • Karolyn

            All the gays and lesbians I have known have been raised in conventional Christian homes, and I’ve known quite a few in my day. I also know lesbians raising kids who are at the top of their games socially and intellectually and are not homosexual. What they are are wonderful accepting contributing members of society who are very well balanced.

          • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

            If you look at the overall statictics they teli a defferent story. Most gay men were abused by a realtive when growing up, they went on to abuse others and it progrsses in exponential fashion. I don’t even want to get into the Priest thing….. I have no doubt there are gay folks that are very committed and industerous people. But, that’s not the norm for that population. I’ll give respect where it’s due. I just want to stop wasting tremendous resources on this issue until we fix a boatload of other problems.

          • Dave

            Show me any reputable study that that supports the notion that most gay men were abused and therefore “turned gay”. There is none. My cousin was never abused at all and we knew he was gave froim age 8. he has been in a loving committed relationship with the same guy for 30 years. If only most heterosexals could say the same thing.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            Karolyn, you just can’t keep yourself from lying.

          • Kevin Wickham

            ummm Ronald Reagan’s daughter turned out to be gay. What are you implying by “learned behavior”?

          • alpha-lemming

            Think about it now….. where do homo children come from?? Are they the product/progeny of homo couples passing on the genetic trait to the next generation?? In the prog-world…. maybe, but trust me… it can’t happen (?? good opportunity for and anti-discrimination or hate-crime law suit???…. it’s not fair…. we need to legislate fertility to homo couples !!!). The ONLY way it happens is via faulty wiring… they live out their happy, selfish, me-centered existence… at the end of life, the genetic dead-end mistake dies with them.

          • mac10
          • Dave

            I did… so the contention is that if the US ok’s same sex marriage… the state devalues the family and put more control in the states hands. Really?

            Of course they have no proof of the load of stuff but we are supposed to take the pastor’s word for it because he has no axe the grind right?

            Its funny, Some people get all hot and bothered over two people getting married of the same sex, yet don’t say anything about people getting divorced left and right from both people having to work to make ends meet thanks to the corporatists.
            Nonsense and hypocrisy abounds here!

      • FreedomFighter

        In case you didnt know: Marriage is “in the eyes of God”
        or it is not marriage.
        The bible did not “ok” slavery.

        • Dave

          Hmmmm…

          ” However, you may purchase male or female slaves from
          among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of
          such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You
          may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent
          inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel,
          your relatives, must never be treated this way.” (Leviticus 25:44-46
          NLT)

          “If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six
          years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his
          freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward,
          only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he
          became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a
          wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be
          free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his
          master. But the slave may plainly declare, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my
          children. I would rather not go free.’ If he does this, his master must
          present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly
          pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master
          forever.” (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)

          “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not
          be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man
          who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed
          to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her.
          And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no
          longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he
          himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or
          clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these
          three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. ”
          (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)
          Now, Jesus never spoke about Marriage did he? Nod your head in agreement. marriage initially was about the joining of property and families as a power move. If you bothered to do any research on the “institution”. The modern definition of marriage did not come about until men decided it was so centuries after Jesus lived.
          But nice feeble try FF. Do you have anything else to justify your bigotry?

          • FreedomFighter

            “The idea that God or Christianity encourages or approves of slavery is shown to be false. In fact, anybody who was caught selling another person into slavery was to be executed. However, since voluntary slavery was widely practiced during biblical times, the Bible proscribes laws to protect the lives and health of slaves. Paul, the author of many of the New Testament writings, virtually ordered the Christian Philemon to release his Christian slave from his service to “do what is proper”. In addition, numerous verses from the New Testament show that God values slaves as much as any free person and is not partial to anyone’s standing before other people”

            Does God Approve of Slavery According to the Bible?
            Contrary to the claims of many skeptics, the New Testament proclaims that all people are equal in the eyes of God – even slaves.

            Laus Deo
            Semper Fi

          • Chris

            Dave, you are wasting your time with theses biblical fanatics. They only believe and quote the parts that they want to. Mention parts they don’t want to hear and they deny or call you an idiot or worse.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            You tell lies about the posters that disagree with your ideology but they tell the truth about you.

          • Karolyn

            And you and those you agree with are the only ones who know what truth is. Truly arrogant. Such a narrow view is truly sad.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            You object to slavery, Dave, but then why are you a slave?

        • nc

          Fighter of freedom. You say “Marriage is “in the eyes of God”, Sound like a quote from the BIBLE! You are old enough to know the Constitution does not require Congress or the Courts to follow any religious definition of a word! You do believe in the Constitution don’t you?? You do realize that neither your say nor my say nor the KJV is the final say in matters of the government?

      • -Disabled American Patriot-

        The Constitution guarantee’s personal freedom, And does not regulate couples unions. If I am wrong please point it out.

        • Dave

          The Constitution guarantees freedom and equality under the law. Homosexuals do not get that at present. Do you have a valid reason why they should not?
          Elton, I have a better understanding of the concept than the bigots here.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            Since when is there a right to hedonism, Dave? It is peculiar how a bigot like yourself claims that people with contrary views to you are bigots

          • TheSilverRanger

            Speak for yourself.

        • Kevin Wickham

          You are correct it does not. Therefore this is NOT a federal matter but rather “left to the states or the people to decide”.

      • -Disabled American Patriot-

        Which Bible version did you read? Or are you just speculating?

      • Elton Robb

        You don’t understand the concept either, Dave.

      • Betta

        “Its NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!”

        Tell that to the gays who define themselves based on how they like to have sex. Tell that to the gays who keep pushing their perversions as “normal”.

        If you want to be gay then have at it. It’s your CHOICE.

        • Karolyn

          Why do people like you always have to dwell on sex? People should be getting married for love and not for sex. I’ve known long-time homosexual couples who didn’t even have sex, just like old married couples. Love keeps them together. If more love were displayed in this world, it wouldn’t be such a mess.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            All right Karolyn, just keep flapping your upper and lower lip. If you knew what love is you would still be married (you yourself commented on this site why you were no longer married). Talk to us when you find out what love is.

          • Karolyn

            Nadzieja – I never commented on why I was no longer married, and that was a long time ago. It’s certainly not the only relationship I have ever been in. Anyone who speaks the way you do does not have much love in her heart. Who are you to tell me I haven’t known love?

    • Kevin Wickham

      I think this is more about the granting of a marriage license really. I have yet to see any state that allows gay marriage forcing any minister to perform the ceremony. I may be wrong, just saying I have not seen any such reports.

      • Nadzieja Batki

        Define “force” because it comes in many forms, overt and covert.
        No thinking was utilised in the wording of your comment, really.

      • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

        The O’homo “administration is ATTACKING TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE on multiple accounts. Not only in the courtroom but I believe they are using the military as a guinea pig for their implementation of a pretty RADICAL HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA, first of all with the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell but the follow up has been that MANY CHAPLAINS and many other SERVICE MEMBERS that are not chaplains feel like their religious liberties are under attack, they’ve been PRESSURED TO CHANGE THEIR PUBLIC POSITIONS and certain military chaplains have been told TO REVISE THEIR ACTUAL SERMONS.”

        “The audacity of the administration to say ‘we don’t like that part of
        Corinthians and we’re going to make certain you DON’T PREACH ABOUT THAT’ as a result I introduced the Military Religious Freedom Protection Act which said if you are a chaplain or any other member of the military, you DON’T GIVE UP YOUR RELIGIOUS CONSCIENCE in order to defend our country.”

        http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/tim-huelskamp-obama-administration-military-radical-homosexual-agenda

    • TheSilverRanger

      The government CANNOT and SHOULD NOT force any religious domination to marry gays in their church. A religion can believe whatever they choose to. But it is NOT the governments place to tell a religious person what to believe, nor is it the job of the church to govern a country. Besides, we’ve seen enough catastrophies occur in the name of god, thanks to the altruistic parasites in the church.

  • John Cherish

    The government has no right to issue marriage licenses at all, a marriage license is is a way to charge a fee on a God given right. In prior times there was never a necessity to issue a piece of paper allowing for one person to be married to another this is the mistake governments make thinking they have the right to regulate marriages this way and it basically violates the 1st amendment.

    That said marriage was originally ordained by God in the Bible and in Genesis God created marriage and since God ordained marriage it is he who can determine what a marriage constitutes. Further in the bible he defines it as being between a man and a woman, he also further defines that a man laying with a man or a woman with a woman is an abomination.

    Therefore in 2000 years of precedence marriage was always defined as being between a man and a woman. If they want to live together as a couple as homosexuals or lesbians let them do so civilly with the same benefits as marriage under the tax codes and laws of man, and call it a civil union.

    Do not call it Marriage something God has ordained for it is not. I for one will never recognize the term marriage being used to describe same sex unions. And as a couple if they say to me they are married I will correct them and say no they are not, that they are only in a civil union. The state may recognize their union but as far as God recognizing they should ask him. they probably won’t like his answer.

    • Karolyn

      Man created marriage, not “God”.

      • Capitalist at Birth

        Blasphemy.

        • Karolyn
          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            Of cause, WHAT blogs the PERVERT lesbian Karolyn is reading: Bilerico.com

            The Bilerico Project is the web’s largest LGBTQ group blog with dozens of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and gender queer contributors. Known for intelligent political and cultural commentary, the site’s carefully selected contributors have helped to shape the LGBT movement for years – both on and off line.

        • Flashy

          Maybe blasphemy in your religion. But then, you aren’t suggesting everyone has to obey your religious doctrines are you?

      • Elton Robb

        Actually, God did create marriage. The symbol of marriage is one where man joins with God; just like the act itself is symbolic of Man joining with God.

        Baptism is symbolic of the Resurrection. Marriage is one of Man joining with God. Every ordinance has something to teach, every ordinance a symbol. When the Eloheim came to this planet to start a colony, they were joined together by Yahweh to set the precedent for Marriage.

        Saying that Man invented marriage is unreasonable, since everyone on the planet earth is descended from that colony. Accepting gay marriage will undoubtedly affirm in the eyes of the Russians that we are Babylon. They won’t be able to stomach our evil then.

        This is in our future:

        Besides that, when we accept Gay Marriage, these will be your new SLAVE Masters:

        Now a number will be killed. But an unfortunate many will be taken back to China to live under the government they want to live under. But these will come and slay our politicians because they are completely out of control:

        And they will be drunk, with blood. Those who will be left in the our Land will be the fortunate ones. Because once they will realize that Obama is not our Lord and Savior but the Christ is — they will turn to the Christ and the Christ will personally send our enemies home packing.

        • Flashy

          OKayyyy….what if one doesn’t believe in your god? Are you saying your “god’ created marriage, thus everyone has to obey your religious doctrine?

          • Elton Robb

            If you don’t believe in God, then you deny the existence of Energy.

          • Flashy

            LOL …. OK, you obviously don’t believe in the Theory of Evolution since according to you, it cannot be “proven”. Same with the Theory regarding Climate Change. Correct .

            OK…Gravity is a theory. So step off a high bridge see where that gets you.

            Yet, you insist people believe in your supernatural spirit as an absolute…

            And the difference between your insistence and the Afghan Taliban or Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood is….what exactly?

          • Elton Robb

            I mean it. Everyone has a concept of God. Mine is defined as Zero Point Energy. Since you put the personal “your” this does mean that it’s my God you’re talking about.

            After all, I don’t worship a who, I worship a “what.” So, Flashy, since the universe constantly gives you evidence that it doesn’t exist, then by that definition you worship the same god, just that you want it to tell you: “I don’t exist.” AND IT DOES!

            After all, it’s purpose in your life is to make you happy so it can learn more about itself. So, do you want to learn about the Law of Cause and Effect or no? Or do you want to be stuck in your stupid, boring life?

      • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

        Prove it.

    • GRusling

      Marriage Licensing was initiated in America to require a “Blood Test” to mitigate the spread of sexually transmitted disease, primarily syphilis. It served it’s purpose – the disease has been controlled – and the time has come to end licensing. “MOST” couples no longer participate in it anyway…

    • Flashy

      ” In prior times there was never a necessity to issue a piece of paper allowing for one person to be married to another” Well…before paper, there were edicts from the King stating before peasants could marry, the leige lord had the Right to deflower the woman prior to the marriage. And earlier, before Nobles could marry (peasants didn’t count as people wayyy back then), they had to have permission of the King.

      And for you to tell someone they aren’t married because YOUR frippin’ religion refuses to acknowledge that…what if they stated the same about you? And referred to your kids as bastards because your “marriage” was not according to their beliefs?

      Hypocrite. Bigotry. Hate. Anger. Ignorance. Which of those would not apply to what you just wrote? ummm….wow, they all apply….

  • Newspooner

    In the past year, this wonderful website has deteriorated, mostly because of the professional Establishment shills trivializing and destroying the excellent discussion comments that were so good in making the comments section so useful. Now it seems that a new format for discussion has been adopted, and it is another step backwards. No wonder we are losing. DaveH, where are you?

    • Doc Sarvis

      I agree, this format/interface is pretty bad.

      • http://personalliberty.com/ Bob Livingston

        Dear Doc Sarvis,

        You write: ” this format/interface is pretty bad.” Can you be specific with your complaint?

        Best wishes,
        Bob

        • Karolyn

          Hi Bob – My opinion is that it makes things more difficult. It’s harder to follow posts; unless signing up with disqus, FB, Twitter or google, one has to post their name each time they post; as posts become more numerous, they have to be loaded. in addition, when posting for the first time you have to translate letters to prove you’re not a machine. The other format was so much easier to follow and read.

        • Doc Sarvis

          I don’t mind signing a name and e-mail over and over (much) and I don’t want to sign onto other services. What I don’t like is very confusing (if at all existing at all) continuity. I’ve had to go back to reload the string several times to feel like I see all the posts, even when I choose to “load more comments”.

    • Jeff Samuels

      Counting his MONEY!!!

  • dan

    I don’t care what others do…I just know that I won’t be doing it again
    (that’s from fear and trepidation if not genuine repentance…)

  • http://www.facebook.com/Mezmurized21 Sean Patrick

    What would Jesus do?

    • Bob666

      Jesus would love them.

      • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

        Yes he would! He just would not have sex with them!

    • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

      Jesus will declare: “‘I NEVER knew you; DEPART from Me, you WORKERS
      OF LAWLESSNESS.” (Matthew 7:21-23), which means: you never
      were Mine.

      God says: “You SHALL NOT lie with a male AS WITH a woman; IT IS AN ABOMINATION/ DETESTABLE/ REPUGNANT/DISGUSTING/ REVOLTING” (Leviticus 18)

      But the godless WICKED/DEPRAVED do everything in their wicked nature to overrule and overwrite God’s Laws/MORAL Standards by changing & twisting Scripture to feet and justify their perversion – debauched lust. They are ignoring the warning: DO NOT distort or twist the Scripture or add to It WHAT is NOT IN.

      God gives us command to rebuke wickedness.

      ‘You shall surely REBUKE your neighbor, and not bear sin because of him.” (Leviticus 19:17)

      Synonyms of REBUKE are: WARN, GIVE A WARNING, ALERT, chide,
      reprimand, reproach, reprove, burn one’s ears

      “…but if he neglects to hear (the TRUTH) … let him be to you as a pagan and a publican.” (Mt.18:17)

      “…avoid them (stay away from them). Such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but THEIR OWN BELLY (interests); and by good words and fair speeches DECEIVE THE HEARTS OF THE SIMPLE (innocents).” (Rom.16:17-18)

      “Do NOT LET ANYONE lead you astray with EMPTY PHILOSOPHY and VAIN DECEIT (high-sounding nonsense) that come FROM MEN and FROM EVIL powers of this world, and not from Christ.” (Col.2:8)

      In the end “Each of us shall give an account of himself to God.”

      “The Lord shall reward the doer of evil according to his wickedness.”

      “Nothing is covered up that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known.” (Luke 12:1-2)

      Jesus warns: “Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” (Matthew 17:18)

      “For according to the work of a man He will repay him, and according to his ways He will make it befall him. Of a truth, GOD will not do wickedly, and
      Almighty WILL NOT PREVENT JUSTICE.” (Job 34:11-12; Rom.2:6)

      “Behold, the storm of the LORD! Wrath has gone forth, a whirling tempest; it
      will burst upon the HEAD OF THE WICKED. The anger of the LORD will not turn
      back until he has EXECUTED and ACCOMPLISHED the intents of His Heart.” (Jeremiah 23)

      “The Lord will send on you cursing, confusion, and REBUKE in all that you set your hand to do, until you are destroyed and UNTIL YOU PERISH quickly, because of the WICKEDNESS of your doings in which you have forsaken Me.” (Deuteronomy 28)

      “For we must all appear before judgment seat of Christ, so that EACH ONE may receive what is due for what he has done IN THE BODY, whether good or evil.” (2Cor.5:10)

      “For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil.” (Eccl.12:14)

      “The Lord shall reward the doer of evil ACCORDING TO HIS WICKEDNESS.” (2Sam.3:39)

      “Do not be attracted by STRANGE DOCTRINES…” (Heb.13:9; Eph.4:14)

      God says that people will be “destroyed for LACK OF KNOWLEDGE”

      The DEPRAVED viciously changing the meaning not only God’s theology, but also the meaning of the words.

      Do NOT fall into their satanic trap.

      There are a lot Satan’s EVIL doers like “Yo moron000” aka “Satanist of the 13 generation out of 14” by his own admission.

      “[T]hey are blind guides.[d] If the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit.” – Jesus Christ (Matthew 15:14)

      What God calls an ABOMINATION, the evil doers call it “equality”, “civil rights”, “human rights”

      What will be NEXT?
      Parents will “marry” their children? Fathers their sons?
      If John Doe loves zebra/dog/donkey and want to “marry” her/him/them?
      He also will cry: “Discrimination”, “where are my ‘civil rights’, ‘human rights’?

      What is going on here, it’s a legalization of insanity and debauchery.

      “Jesus said, ‘If you hold to MY TEACHING, you are REALLY MY DISCIPLES. 32 Then YOU WILL KNOW the TRUTH, and THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE.’” (John 8:31-32)

      “Great is TRUTH, and mighty above all things.” (2Ezdra 4:41)

      Sean Patrick, seek the TRUTH, the LORD’s TRUTH and not the wicked.

      • Karolyn

        AlondraWhy can’t you get it through your head that not all people believe in what you believe? Why should they be punished for YOUR beliefs? The Bible was create by man for control. This is NOT a religion issue.

        • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

          Karolyn says: “Why should they be punished for YOUR beliefs?”
          They will not be punished for MY beliefs. They, including you, lesbian, will be punished for your WICKEDNESS.

          Karolyn: “The Bible was create by man for control.”
          “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was GOD. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was not any thing made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not.” (Jn.1:1-5)

          The WORD became the flash, and not flesh became word.

          “All Scripture IS BREATHED OUT by God and PROFITABLE FOR TEACHING, FOR REPROOF, FOR CORRECTION, AND FOR INSTRUCTION IN RIGHTEOUSNESS, that the man of God[b] may be complete, equipped for every good work.” (2Timothy 3:16-17)

          God’s “WORD is TRUE from the beginning and every one of your
          righteous judgments endures for ever.” (Ps.119:160)

          “EVERY WORD OF GOD PROVES TRUE; He is shield to those who put their TRUST in Him. DO NOT ADD TO HIS WORDS, lest HE REBUKE you and YOU BE FOUND A LIAR.” (Proverbs 30:5-6)

          I just wondering: When you’ll STOP to spew your STUPIDITY and IGNORANCE.

          “Do not speak in the hearing of the FOOLS, for THEY DESPISE THE WISDOM & KNOWLEGE” – King Solomon (Proverbs 23)

          • Bob666

            Yo Fat Back,

            “They will not be punished for MY beliefs. They, including you, lesbian, will be punished for your WICKEDNESS”
            You really are consumed with Homosexuals-Why???

      • Bob666

        Yo Porkenstein.

        “There are a lot Satan’s EVIL doers like “Yo moron000” aka “Satanist of the 13 generation out of 14” by his own admission”.

        Your family would not get accepted, one has to pass a character test-you have none. Go give your boy Putin a big hug Commie Girl and we can help you relocate to “mother” Russia.

        Here is some reading that might help you find salvation:

        http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0313/cardozo_freedom_passover.php3#.UV7hGMLD_EZ

        Don’t let the door hit you in your rotund sand trap on the way out.

  • KENYAN KRUSHER

    It’s just a matter of time before, 3 or 4 people will want to be married……It’s not really about marriage or civil rights, it’s about legitimizing perversion & calling it normal so they can feel good about themselves…after decades of brainwashing by the progressive/Lib elites in the public schools, college campuses, on Madison Ave. & the Hollywood crowd & TV Crowd, this is the place we are at: over 60% of the young think it’s OK, The homosexuals & their enablers will not be satisfied until all agree with them or are bullied into silence….Well, I believe nations like individuals have souls & make karma both good & bad, and this is bad karma, for govts. to sanction darkness & call it Light & Love….if it is really a Universal civil right, how come there have to be so many conscience provisions????….How can it be a civil right, if they can change their behavior at any time?…just because they feel this way when born does not mean they have to indulge in it, does it? All of us have the Law, Cosmic Law, Divine Law, Natural Law written in our hearts & we all know Good or Bad….The key to understanding life & this issue is “Karma & Reembodiment”, during one of their lifetimes, they indulged in this satanic behavior & now they have a momentum on it & can’t quit it so easily, making it more legitimate by allowing them to marry, will make it harder for them to stop!

    • Karolyn

      Who said they can change their behavior at any time? I too believe in much of what you say regarding karma and reincarnation. However, I also believe that people are who they are. Have you ever had a serious discussion with a gay man or lesbian woman? I have had dear dear friends who were gay and lesbian. How can someone who knew they were different at an early age go against what he or she knows him or herself to be? That is living inauthentically. Would you e comfortable living a lie?

    • nc

      Kenyan. a man and woman get married in a church with two preachers and a choir and 6 prayers! On their honeymoon night they engage in only anal sex on the fear the bride will get pregnant! BUTT (no pun intended) They both enjoy it and who knows, even God(?may have gotten a kick out watching this couple, married in his name, showing their love for each other! Do we send in the “perversion police” or just let God(?) “handle it” ? (again, no pun intended)
      PS: Whatever efforts you made to Krush the Kenyan in the Oval Office he sure does appreciate the 8 years you helped him attain! The best laid plans of mice and men often get laughed at! Better luck next time!!

  • Tigermarc

    I honestly could care less about this issue. I have no problem either way. I guess if gays want to be miserable like the rest of married couples, then go ahead.
    But this topic is getting waaaayy to much publicity. There other things that could use more attention like auditing the fed, Monsanto gmo, North Korea , DHS purchasing over 1 billion bullets and some 2000 tanks I believe, and these stupid gun laws they’re trying to put in place
    What a joke

    • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

      Right on! Go get em Tiger!

    • JCfromDC

      Yeah, me too. Useless trivia, the more we argue about it, the more advertising dollars the media gets in their pockets. That’s now a billion and a half hollow point bullets, Homer. It’s up to 7,000 armored wheeled carriers, that can be fitted with machine guns, small caliber cannons, TOW missiles, anything you can imagine that can strap on.

      THAT is the Freedom, or loss of it, we need to be concerned about.

    • James

      I work in an industry where there are quite a few gays. Their lifestyle does not threaten my hetero marriage. It appears that being gay is as genetic as being tall, obese, ugly, beautiful, healthy or sick. None of them CHOSE to be gay, they just had to learn to deal with it. Clearly, environmental factors can tip some individuals one way or another.

      The issue in congress and the media is blown way out of proportion. Tigermarc is right, there are waaaaay more important problems to deal with.

      • Nadzieja Batki

        Your words betray you. You are not married and the rest of your verbiage is manure which can’t even be used in the fields.

      • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

        James says: “It appears that being gay is as genetic”

        James, it’s a LIE. Scientists have not been able to find any gene or combination of genes that will make someone gay.

        None Biological study could find any “gay” gene or chromosome.

        A Scientific Examination of Homosexuality and the “Gay Gene”

        “The human X and Y chromosomes (the two “sex” chromosomes) have been completely sequenced. Thanks to work carried out by labs all across the globe, we know that the X chromosome contains 153 million base pairs, and harbors a total of 1168 genes (see NCBI, 2004). The National Center for Biotechnology Information reports that the Y chromosome—which is much smaller—contains “only” 50 million base pairs, and is estimated to contain a mere 251 genes. Educational institutions such as Baylor University, the Max Planck Institute, the Sanger Institute, Washington University in St. Louis, and others have SPENT
        COUNTLESS HOURS AND MILLIONS OF RESEARCH DOLLARS ANALYZING THESE UNIQUE CHROMOSOMES. As the data began to pour in, they allowed scientists to construct gene maps—using actual sequences from the Human Genome Project. And yet, NEITHER THE MAP FOR the X NOR the Y chromosome CONTAINS ANY “GAY GENE.”

        “What is the truth regarding homosexuality?
        POLITICS PLAY a MAJOR ROLE in its assessment as well as SPECULATION, OPINIONS and EMOTIONS, but NOT FACTS.
        http://www.trueorigin.org/gaygene01.asp

        “Great is TRUTH, and mighty above all things.” 2Ezdra 4:41

        • GALT

          So where is the hetero sexual gene located?

          Let the games begin.

        • TheRealFreedomFighter

          The earth is also only 6000 years old too . Dont forget that

    • Nadzieja Batki

      If you could care less about this issue, why is it that you put down so many words to the contrary?

    • Right Brain Thinker

      How about Anthropogenic Global Warming? Some very disturbing things have been happening over the last few years. Google “Youtube Arctic Sea Ice Death Spiral” for a look at something that is happening RIGHT NOW, and that was not predicted to happen for several decades. Without going into detail, it has HUGE significance because of the many ways it “interlocks” with the other parts of the AGW puzzle. Things are looking so bad that most of the things Tigermarc mentions will soon be forgotten. (With the exception of that lunatic child in North Korea—-if he does something foolish, that would get our attention bigtime).

  • Deerinwater

    Rarely do I ever agree with Rush. Never wanted too. ~ But it has been a redefining process of the word “Marriage” ~

    Why could the term “Civil Union” not be used instead of marriage and avoid slapping everyone that’s married a slap in the face? ~ I don’t know.

    I do believe homosexuals are victims of nature and natural selection process. The accounting is made difficult by the stigma and social out-casting but it’s said that homosexuals make up somewhere from 4% to 7 % of the population. It’s difficult to count those in the closet ~ the number could be as high as 10%.

    Being a homosexual is not a personal choice anymore then being heterosexual. ~ ‘Wrong brain in the wrong body’. ~ attempt to understand it that way ~ and you’ll avoid all the rabbit trails, misunderstandings and psychobabble.

    As a society of people and laws , we have attempted to ignore this 7% of the population. It’s easy enough to do until ~ until one day you find it at your own door step and you are then forced to deal with it in your own way.

    Obviously, ~ for the survival of mankind ~ everyone can’t be gay. ~ While we need to understand that it’s not contagious but more of a birth defect.

    While the last thing a Gay wants to hear is that they are a product of a birth defect. ~ It’s not uncommon for anyone to wish themselves found special, it applies to “gays” as well. They will not allow us to label them in such a light as a “defect” ~ so they fight for their small place in the world.

    They come as they are, ~ as they were created and have had to accept it. ~ This accepting of self ~is not easy for them ~ some never do as we see the suicide rate among the Gay community is very high,

    That we confuse acknowledgement with condoning , it tears at our “reasoning” while society and our system of laws has been responsible of persecuting victims of birth and adding insult to injury.

    i just wished they’d used the term “civil union” and afforded the same heartaches, rights and freedoms as straights in wedded bliss.

    I greatly resent ~ the practice ~ of tweaking words. If we can’t depend on words for communication , we are left to employ something more direct and personal.

    As for biblical accounting ~ that many of you would wish to bring forward in defense of your anti-gay position. ~ This is just more evidence that there is nothing new under the sun and that “Man” wrote the bible and not the “Creator” . ~ The Creator does not write, ~ the Creator creates ~ and that includes “Gays”, Polio, Floods, Epidemics and Droughts.

    So ~ put away your Chicken bone, Totem, Magic smoke and Mojo and step into the 21 Century , the world of rational thinking. You with not find any sound defense in bible verse unless you plan on employing “magic”.

  • metroman

    Gay marriage, huh. When I was a teen the person was a homosexual or as we said a homo and she was a lisbo. From the war on dugs to the war on terrorism everything is done incrementally including the homosexual issue. Like a large majority of the people I do not care what two consenting adults do behind close doors but this is not about the sexual act; It is about making abnormal behavior normal.

    I am not a strongly religious person but I do believe in God. I consider the bible a historical message from God to guide man through the maze of past, present and the future. The forefathers of our county use the bible and history as a guide to create this Democratic Republic. Yes, I said Democratic Republic and not a democracy that the talking heads try to push. A democracy is two alligator and a poodle voting on what’s for lunch and a Republic is the same situation but me standing there with a Bushmaster making sure they follow the rule book aka The Constitution of the United States.

    The point of the diversion above is the gay issues is not about marriage, it is about SEX and making homosexual behavior normal. It’s about incrementalism and redefining words and making an abnormal act normal. It is patently not. If it were normal the human specie would have disappeared long ago. Remember boys and girls “just want to have fun.” Have fun all you abnormal people but do not try the Owellian logic like are so called Public Servants are using on us such as “war is peace, ignorance is strength, or double think. This is another diversion to take are eye off the ball. Wake up to INCREMENTALISM!

  • Dave

    All these “freedom” loving conservatives… But their love a freedoms stops at their own.

    In the eyes of the Gov, marriage is a LEGAL contract that affords you tax, medical and other benefits. If you stand against same-sex marriage then your whole “freedom” blatherings are just a big lie.

    If you do not like same-sex marriage, my advice to you is to is don’t marry someone of the same sex. Same sex marriage does not hurt you, it does not hurt society, children or the “institution” of marriage. You have a stronger case for protecting the “insititution” of mariage if you busy-bodies went after shows like the “Bachelor”. How about Divorce?

    Homosexuals pay taxes, help build this country and contribute. People of legal age have a right to engage in legal contracts. To same-sex marriage opponents: Your religious-based bigotry has no place in today’s America. We prize freedom over irrational fear of what you refuse to understand or can’t.

    Your time is ending… If you don’t like it, then Saudi Arabia, Iran might be the place for you.

    • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

      I could care less about legal contracts. The number of laws on the books have been increasing exponentially for years and our society is way less better off. The fact is, this tiny minority uses way more resources than their numbers can ever justify. The busy bodies you speak of are the less than 2% of loud mouths that want to PUSH their “New Noms” on the rest of us. No group of that size deserves the press their getting. Yes, they pay taxes and are helping to build this country but in the wrong direction. This constant but accelerating drift to the left is destroying America and giving this group special privlidges will further accelerate that decline. My objections aren’t entirely religious based but are medical and common sense based. I don’t like it one bit and if the gay folks want to marry then go someplace where it’s legal and suck tax money there. Send them to Saudia Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Afganistan, Pakistan…. and they’ll probably get beaten to death for being perverts. This is MY COUNTRY and I will not pander to a tiny whiney minority.They can already enter into any legal contract the rest of us can. Nobody is taking anything away from them. Get off of your liberal soapbox before you slide off and really hurt yourself.

      • Bob666

        Wow Sharon,

        “This is MY COUNTRY and I will not pander to a tiny whiney minority.They can already enter into any legal contract the rest of us can. Nobody is taking anything away from them. Get off of your liberal soapbox before you slide off and really hurt yourself”.

        It is my country too and regardless of 2% or 8% (probably in between), it’s their country as well.
        Do you have problems sharing the sand box?????

        • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

          I have posted reliable evidence of the number of homosexual folks living in this country. About 1.7%, you have not. I will not sit idly by and watch any tiny group push their self serving agendas, call it civil rights yet refuse to enter into civil unions rather than traditional marriage. It’s childish behavior that I would expect from a 2 year old. Two year olds get in trouble for doing exactly the same thing. Homosexuals only want it to be their country so long as they can change it to suit their purposes. You want to vote for that, go ahead. But this issue is being purposely blown out of proportion by a media that cares only about making money. I would easily argue THAT is a bigger issue than homosexual marriage. When we solve the other problems before us, let’s revisit this issue and resolve it factually without all the media hype. I never said to dismiss this, just prioritize it where it belongs. We have have way more pressing issues to deal with and this is defocusing us from dealing with what is really important. This little group is way more at risk because of their behavior and to use tax dollars that we don’t have to support it is just as much nonsense as the DHS buying up enough ammo to fight the last war 4 times over. Also done on the taxpayers backs. I won’t just share my sandbox with you, I’ll give you the whole thing. Pound away!

          • Karolyn
          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            Sharon, the slate.com is a Liberal site.
            Do you know ANY truthfull Liberal site?

            “Even for those for whom the liberalness of the media is a popular refrain, Slate’s results were shockingly lopsided. In total, 55 of the 57 votes went to O’homobama”

            Important FACT: The site is owned by The Washington Post Company

            ENOUGH said.

          • Karolyn

            Alondra – That was my post, and there were other sites with similar percentages. I just chose that at random.

          • Bob666

            Yo Pork Belly.
            And Just maybe because Obama Won.
            Slate is a great deal more factual that some of the crap that you post.

  • jim b

    We can almost assuredly assume that that which is not normal for reproduction for a species (the creation of life i.e. the ultimate goal of any species, or civilized society) would be considered abnormal. As the creation of life/reproduction is the dominating goal of any species, it stands to reason that vast majority of the population will frown on those who do not abide by these laws of nature. As part of that dominating drive to create life exists, societal and cultural foundations were formed. The foundation of life not only included the procreation, but the foundation of nurturing as well. A large portion, the catalyst of the societal and cultural development of our species, is the foundation of marriage. Therefore to give the designation of such a well-founded definition, marriage, to those who through their own choosing cannot participate in the creation of life, which the vast majority of the species associates with marriage, is an imposturous use of the word.

    • WTS/JAY

      Well said, Jim!

  • KG

    I was married. To a nice “christian” girl who told me that marriage was “…forever, because God said so.” Well, when she approached me after about 3 years of marital bliss, she said “…I want a divorce.” It was then that the true nature of marriage came to me. It’s just a very expensive way for a guy to get his laundy done.

    But even deeper than that, i realized that marriage is NOTHING BUT A LEGAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE. IT IS NOTHING MORE. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THAT IS “SACRED” OR “HOLY” ABOUT IT.

    So, since it’s just a “legal” definition, pima facea it is NON-SEXUAL.

    It is like saying “Toyota owners can only buy parts from Toyota”
    If Gays want to be married, then they should be given the right to be miserable, just like all the other married heteros.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      First of all, the woman you married was not a “Christian”.
      The posters you detest and are blamed for all your ills of the world did not choose your “wife” for you.
      By the way, the woman chooses the man who will choose her so therefore your ex had her peculiar reasons for choosing you to choose her. Still we are not to blame for that.

  • John Adams

    Chip, I believe you have taken the high road on this issue, and I agree that the federal government should keep its mouth shut and stay out of this conversation altogether. I agree further that the re-definition of ‘marriage’, or the ‘hypenization’ of ‘marriage’ (as opposed to ‘hypenation’ which is purely a grammatical issue) has diluted the term to near meaninglessness. ‘Marriage’ has now been reduced to a purely legal term, for filing tax claims and insurance forms, and little else. The social ‘institution’ of marriage, as concerns both the conception and the raising of children – traditionally ‘performed’ by the same mongamous couple – will soon be lost in the fog of relativism that has claimed so many other sociological values and norms, all of which may be for the future good of mankind … or not …

    Regardless, I think the adoption of laws that approve same sex marriage shopuld be the task and privilege of each state legislature; it should not be dictated “from above”. Aach state should be able to decide when, or if, the time has come to adopt such laws. In effect, they should be able to claim the same right as the Boy Scouts of America; each state is its own “club”, and should be able to decide its own future. No more, no less.

  • nobodysfool

    I think it’s sad that “these people” (they know who they are) cannot be defined as “a really great person who is always willing to help, is a highly qualified (fill in the blank) at his work, etc. Instead, their entire existence consists of “homosexual”. If sex is all you are, that’s just sad. There’s so much more to life.

    • Karolyn

      It’s not all about sex. That is all anti-gays think about. They leave out the concept of love.

  • Steve E

    I don’t call my relationship with my wife “marriage” anymore since this word has been perverted. I now call the relationship “Holy Matrimony”. Now, the homosexuals won’t come near that word.

    • Doc Sarvis

      Oh really?

    • kr

      Ok know gays that are far more Christian than the pigheaded fools on this site

      • Kenyan Krusher

        HAHAHA!!! You Jesus would really approve of homosexuality!!! Love the sinner, condemn the sin!!! & HOMOS ARE BIG TIME SINNERS…worse than most because if they enter into this lifestyle (which they know in their hearts & souls is wrong), they LIVE it EVERYDAY, EVERY HOUR, EVERY MINUTE….this is making BIG TIME BAD KARMA!!

        • TheSilverRanger

          God says THIS is a sin. God says THAT is a sin. Can’t you think for yourself?

          • FreedomFighter

            Obviously he does think for himself, he has read the Bible, recognized its validity as the word of the creator written by men.

            You ridicule – an Alinski tactic to subdue – ridicule is impossible to defend against due to its irrational nature, infuriates the reader, thus providing irrevalent blather in place of valid conversation.

            Cant you think for yourself? You only parrot progressive talking points and ridicule, adding nothing, thus demonstrating the weakness of your position if you had one to begin with.

            Laus Deo — Praise be to GOD
            Semper FI —Forever loyal

          • TheSilverRanger

            There’s a big reason why I’m claiming he can’t think for himself. And for you to compare me with those radical left-wing terrorists and morons is a falacy. I despise people like Saul Alinski and Bill Ayres, but I digress. What is ticking me off, is that you people have the nerve to claim that you’re following the word of god, but those words, in and of themselves are hateful and hypocritical. Are you religious “straight” people STILL this upset about gay marriage in the United States? Seriously?

            As the years have gone by and certain states have legalized gay marriage, the rest of the country has trembled in fear at the implications it will have on “the sanctity of marriage.” Sanctity of marriage? Are you freaking kidding me? Have you actually LOOKED at the statistics of marriage, Freedom Fighter? I mean REALLY LOOKED at them? Half of the “straight people” who get married, get divorced, half of the straight couples who live together ARE NOT even married, and those that are are always bickering and complaining about their significant other; they use their children as pawns in bitter divorce battles, and even the family dog has had to bear the brunt of the dysfunctional American marriage. Nobody likes their in-laws, and children are a pain in the rear. Judging by all that, it’s pretty clear and established that the “straight community” DOES NOT give a damn about the “sanctity of marriage.”

            And that is why gay people SHOULD get married. If anyone is going to appreciate the concept and institutions of these unions, it will be them. They FOUGHT for the right to be married. They’ve taken media backlash for it; they’ve been beaten, spat upon and ridiculed. But they still perservere and want to marry their significant other. They’re not standing on the altar with a shotgun to their head, they’re fighting through crowds of angry protestors, and backwards-thinking religious fanatics in order to marry someone they LOVE! That’s how important it is to them.

            ‘But Franklyn, the Bible says that marriage is between a man and a woman.” Really? I’m the last person you should throw that Bible BS at.

            1. The Bible has been manipulated by humankind from its’ inception. Even if you, Freedom Fighter and Kenyan Krusher, believe it to be the “word of God,” humans have had WAY too much of an influence on it with people like you tweaking it for your own personal and religious gain.

            2. Religion is a personal choice, NOT LAW. Your religious views may not be the same as another. Get over it. You and Kenyan Krusher DO NOT have the right to force and impose your views on other people. That’s the reason why the United States of America was founded: RELIGIOUS FREEDOM! Do any of you remember THAT?

            3. FREE WILL. If God gaves us all the free will to do what we want, then what’s the problem? These people WANT to get married of THEIR OWN FREE WILL. Now you’re just contradicting God by trying to stop them from doing what they want, and God’s gonna get you for that. While were at it, why do people like you even think that an all-powerful God even NEEDS your help in the first place? He created things like earthquakes, volcanoes, hurricanes, do I even need to go on?

            4. If you think it’s “God’s will” that marriage is only between a man and a woman, then why not let God sort them out during the Rapture. You know? Where’s that religious faith in God I keep hearing so much about? If people like you and Kenyan Krusher truly do have faith in God, then you should know that he/she/it in his/her/it’s all-knowing wisdom will do what needs to be done. So don’t worry yourself about it; it is NOT YOUR PROBLEM.

            Personally, I would not be so bold and egotistical as to claim I know what God’s will truly is. What if God changed his mind? You don’t know that. Neither of us knows what God wants or does not want. He didn’t send YOU a memo. DEAL WITH IT! The only thing I can say about the Bible, is that the Ten Commandments are a darn good list of dos-and-don’ts that people should and need to take into consideration.

            So, with all that has been said, as gay marriage is coming to your cities and states, don’t worry about it. It’s not a big deal. Let gay people get married, and allow the gay community to figure out that marriage is nothing more than a hollow institution like the rest of us mere mortals have.

            What do you say to that, Freedom Fighter? I await your response.

            “Why worship a flag or god when we could worship the best of us: our will to be great.”—-Andrew Ryan

          • FreedomFighter

            Derek Prince – The Roles of Husband and Wife Part 1 & 2

            Start here for your answers.
            Laus Deo
            Semper FI

          • TheSilverRanger

            What does that have to do with what I have just said, and the words I have pointed out? What does this minister’s words have to do with the price of tea in China? I made 4 particular points in my argument, and the only response you have is a youtube video? You’re too lazy to type out your own own words? You’ve got a lot to learn before you beat me intellectually. Try again, kid.

          • FreedomFighter

            Sorry I really dont have the time to be your teacher – I have pointed you to a guide Derik Prince that would help you find the answers you request — up to you now to walk the path.

            Speak of God and the demons do howl.

            Laus Deo

            Semper FI

          • TheSilverRanger

            Then if you cannot explain it to me properly, then you lose the argument. I’ve listened to his points, and it has done nothing to counter act the points that I’ve tried to make. And I’ve got better things to do then to try to debate with someone like you. It’s nothing but debating logic with an illogical person. People like you are incapable of logic.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

            My Goodness!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Nadzieja Batki

            What intellect are you laying claim to? Your comments don’t position you into any catagory of intellectualism.

          • TheSilverRanger

            How about trying to counter my points instead of attacking me personally, you guttersnipe.

          • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

            Nadzieja, do you know at least one intellectual Libtard?

          • TheSilverRanger

            The sad thing is, you call me to a liberal, when I am far from one. Liberals are nothing more than parasites, just like their facist and communist bretheren. If you’ve nothing constructive to say, or you have nothing to counter my argument with, then don’t say a thing. That makes you just a big a guttersnipe as Nadzieja is. Go back and try again, kid.

          • JOHN

            You have no argument to be countered with. What you have to say is based on nothing but your pointless opinion.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

            what point are you trying to make as I am straight

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

            aw mi wa !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • GALT

            Don’t be too upset with the “willfully ignorant, functional illiterates”
            here, as religious hypocrites FIRST, their “intolerance” extends
            their hypocrisy to almost every other issue, where if they had any true understanding of the “faith” they claim belief in, they would have to accept the fact that they have zero chance of being admitted to the eternal paradise, they pretend they are actually striving for.

            Their concern with both the material world and the behavior of others is clear testament to their lack of character and immorality, and if you do not agree with them, they will defend their faith, even if it kills YOU……..because none of them are or ever have been in a hurry to actually get to this “promised paradise”.

            The ultimate hypocrisy, is that the reward they seek is
            dependent on their “gods” final judgement, and yet for some strange reason, they are not content to let their “god” actually be the “final judge”……

            So it seems there isn’t very much “faith” among the “faithful”.

            “When gods cease to be powerful, they necessarily become good.”

          • TheSilverRanger

            Thank you very much for that. You’ve made my day. This is why I choose to believe to err on the side of humility and find out what’s truly out there once I’m dead. If God truly is a kind and loving God, he’ll have the ability to guide me and show me what I have done wrong. God, after all, is supposed to be a teacher, is he not? Besides, I’ve tried to reason with the people here, but judging from the comments I’ve recieved from the religious believers on this sight, the prefer to judge and attack me personally, rather than try to make counter-claims to my points, and use logic and intellect. If it’s one thing I’ve always loathed about organized religion, whether it be Christianity, Judaism, Roman Catholicism, and especially Islam, is that you must believe what THEY do, lest you be condemned, judged, and even put to death. That is why I choose not to believe in any organized religion. Why else would I choose not to believe? I’ll ask and answer this question: “What is the difference between a man, and a slave?” Answer: “A man chooses, a slave obeys.”

          • FreedomFighter

            More guidance to answers:

            Chuck Missler

            “What is the difference between a man, and a slave?” Answer: “A man chooses, a slave obeys.”

            Wrong:

            “What is the difference between a man, and a slave?” Answer: “A master has guns, a slave does not.”

            Laus Deo
            Semper FI

          • TheSilverRanger

            You’re just basically repeating my proverb by saying it differently. It’s the same damn difference. And please, enough with the youtube videos. They are not really doing much to prove my point, and you’re showing that you cannot lose an argument gracefully. What you’re doing with these youtube videos is that you’re trying to deflect the argument away from my point. It’s because you know I’m right, and you need to distract me from being right.

          • GALT

            Cool, you have guns…..you must be free.

            ( of course, now you spend all your free time, guarding
            your guns ……..enjoy. )

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

            Come on now get real if you read the bible God is teaching you,
            God created Hell for Satan and his Angels, if you wind up there it is by choice not gods will that you should parish but have ever lasting life with him in Heavens Glory

          • Elton Robb

            God created hell for the devilish. :(

          • KG

            Thomas Jefferson called them “pseudo Christians”.

            They “claim” Christ, and yet they deny him his power.

            Jesus also had a name for them. He called them “Hypocrites! Vipers! and white washes tombs.”

          • GALT

            Never could make sense of the contradiction, that while
            “eternal damnation” was not only a insufficient punishment for
            the sinner, it had to begin immediately if not sooner, while
            “eternal reward” didn’t quite have the same “immediacy” or
            allure, and is put off and delayed as long as possible.

            Doing the Lord’s work……a tough job, but I guess
            somebody has to do it……..they are such a “self sacrificing”
            lot.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

            for shame for shame!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Kenyan Krusher

            If you would get rid of the debris in your soul, you might be able to see & feel the Law, not the Law written in books like the Bible (although full of profound truths, also much error put in by the Fallen Angels to divide us & keep souls from the truth)….Cosmic Law, Divine Law, Natural Law, that is written in all our hearts, even the Homos…..Nations, states, cities, organizations have souls just like individuals & for them to sanction darkness & call it Light & Love & Equal Rights brings bad karma upon them.. we are living in an reprised of age of Sodom & Gomorrah…as an American I do not want to see it happen!

          • Kinetic1

            KK,

            I have searched my heart and while I do not feel the desire to love another man, neither do I feel that I am right to condemn the love of others. The fact that you feel such love is “dark” concerns me much more than the love between two people who’s choices I do not share. And there you go with Karma again!

            As for Sodom and Gomorrah, read the tail again, but this time do so without bias or predisposition.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

            They hide their light under a bush.

          • Elton Robb

            You will.

          • Right Brain Thinker

            One of the best short essays I have ever read on PLD. Excellent job!

            And do not waste time trying to discuss anything with Freedom Fighter or Nadzieja (which translates from the Polish as “hope”, if you can believe that). As you have noted in another comment, the concept of logic is alien to them.

            I will throw my meager two cents in on top of yours. The bible (of which there are some 600 versions in print for some strange reason—-which one is “inerrant”?) is a fine piece of literature that offers some lessons on how to behave (or not behave). Those lessons are ignored by many of those who thump it the hardest, and many of them post on PLD.

            There have been many thousands of gods and thousands of religions and hundreds of “holy books” down through history. What arrogance and pride drives the so-called “Christians” here to declare that their “book” and their “religion” is viewed with more favor by god (who has never been proven to exist anyway)? Christians are in a minority on the planet, and the humans who rely on some other “holy book” for guidance far outnumber them. If I were god and really cared at all for the human species, I think I would tend to favor the Buddhists over those who “kill for Chist” and otherwise behave in unChristian ways. The nature-worshipping groups would also be high on my list—-at least they pay respects to my creations rather than destroy them in the name of profit and “free markets”.

            This whole thing is a civil rights issue anyway, just as women’s suffrage and voting rights for blacks were. The Constitution affords certain rights to all, and the bible has nothing to do with it. The federal courts will have their say some day on the basis of civil rights and the states will behave in Christian (or non Christian) ways depending on how backward and ‘red” they are, and life will go on. As SilverRanger says, the gays will very likely be better at “marriage” than those who are screwing it up right now.

            All you religious “screamers” need to wake up and realize that you are being used by the special interests who want to turn this country into a corporate feudal state. They are trying to turn this country against itself so that they can rebuild it to their liking. You are proving very useful to them by your mindless refusal to see what is going on.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

            hey don’t talk about my Jesus, the bible’s perdiction are coming true how do you explain that , excuse my spelling sorry only about that.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

            another amen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • CommonSense4America

            Let God take care of it. Aids is not the desease, it’s the cure.

          • KG

            You are only parroting Rush Limburgers “Talking points”.
            Turn off your AM radio, and change the channel on your TV from FOX. And you MAY be able to actually see the REAL WORLD.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

            yippie ya ya ga ya

          • Gary

            It makes a person more comfortable in their own skin to not listen to the so-called conservative talk show hosts and do your own research at reputable places on the internet. Rush, Sean, Bill O, Mark Levin among others have been a disgrace!!! They’ve lied to us and mislead many people who are swallowing their garbage to their own demise. It’s a shame!

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

            amen

          • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

            Yep, it’s bad AND dangerous

          • TheSilverRanger

            If it’s bad AND dangerous for you to think for one’s self, then not only do you not believe in free will, but that makes you nothing more, than a facist PARASITE. And the parasite HATES 3 things: Free will, free enterprise, free men.

          • Kenyan Krusher

            When one does not believe in God, they’ll believe in anything!!

            Men & women are free in America to do whatever they want to…but when the govt. sanctions their darkness & calls it Light, I have to stand up for Truth & speak!! make no mistake this is NOT a civil rights issue, for to me to be a civil rights issue, it has to be a Universal Right & if there are numerous conscience protections, it can’t be a true right, case closed!!! These souls can if they choose to, change their behavior at any time, right? But, rather than putting the hard spiritual work in needed to change their behaviors, it is easier to get everyone on board & say , “No, you are normal, the others are bigots & haters” &, to bully & coerce everyone into silence about it & then they can feel good about themselves…It’s not about nay benefits, it is simply about wanting to be perceived as normal & they ain’t normal, they are perverse, satanic in their actions…..Trust me, in many quiet moments, they question what they are doing!! God does not create homosexuals, at some point in the lifestream of their souls, in one of their embodiments, they have engaged in this behavior & now have a momentum on it, and can’t stop so easily..by many societies legitimizing it, ain’t gonna help, that’s for sure!!

          • Kinetic1

            KK,
            How impressive that, above all others know what God has and has not created! And how wise are you to understand what has lead Homosexuals to feel as they do. Perhaps we should all set aside our beliefs and follow you as you have all the answers.

            Take a look in your Bible and consider what you are doing. If I’m not mistaken, you will find much to condemn your own actions.

          • Kinetic1

            Sorry for the typo. How impressive that you, above all others …

          • GALT

            “Stop telling god what to do!”

            Stop it……STOP IT NOW!!!!!!!

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

            a man should get pregnant and have a baby then and only then would I believe it was gods will

          • Kenyan Krusher

            Of course I can think for myself, and I can feel for myself, and it is clear to me that a man sticking his penis into another man’s butt & to call it Love & Light ain’t right!!! Are you an atheist? If so, you haven’t been doing much thinking or feeling have you?

          • TheSilverRanger

            On the contrary, I do not consider myself an atheist. I’m an agnostic. I believe in a power and/or being greater than me. I do not, however, believe in your God. No matter which one you’ve chosen, he isn’t mine. I know this because the overwhelming majority of you have been told who your God is based on a book written by men 50 years after the events allegedly occurred. I know this also because most of you have learned who your God is by being scared into it every weekend for years by men telling you what to believe about why you are a sinner and should give them money.

          • FreedomFighter

            Sorry you do not see the answers to the questions you asked to be answered. Not to choose a side, is still to choose a side. I will leave you with one last link …

            The Black Awakening – End Times

            If you choose to see, you will find every single event in the prophetic event in the Bible is history, “real history” and this history is playing out now.

            Laus Deo
            Semper FI

          • TheRealFreedomFighter

            Oh btw the bible says the Earth is 6000 years old and apparently god thinks its ok to drown all of his children so he can start again. Not much morality or logic in that.

          • FreedomFighter

            It says this era started then…you tare.
            Laus Deo
            Semper Fi

          • TheRealFreedomFighter

            I dont think any man can be a true american patriot until he gives full authority to the Constitution and not to a book full of contradictions

          • http://www.facebook.com/dave.bintliff.3 Dave Bintliff

            The bible says to follow gods commands so a Christian denies his own mind and follows the word of God. Mans mind and heart is wicked, that is why a Christian follows the word of god and doesn’t ” think for themselves.”

          • FreedomFighter

            Bravo Sierra Dave, it takes allot of thought to buck the system, not go with the crowd down the wide and easy road, it takes incredable will power to resist and maintain moral integrity. Easy is going with the flow, easy is to give in to immoral ways, easy is it to have a wicked heart…

            It is no easy task to follow GODS commands, it is easy to follow ones own thought, wants and needs.

            Laus Deo
            Semper FI

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

            Amen and another amen

        • Kinetic1

          KK,

          I’ll give you your sin, as such belief is a matter of ones religion and their interpretation, but “BIG TIME BAD KARMA!”?

          1) Karma depends on belief in reincarnation. Christianity teaches that, after death ones soul either resides in torment or in the presence of God. Reincarnation is not accepted by the Bible.

          2) Karma suggests that ones actions in this life will determine his experience in the next. Is it your argument that, because the God of Christianity by some interpretations rejects homosexuality that one man expressing love for another would somehow curse them in a future existence?

          Buddhism is vague at best on the subject of homosexuality, so it’s hard to imagine that a union between to loving partners would result in “BIG TIME BAD KARMA!”

        • JOHN

          Here’s what Jesus says about homosexuality in the Bible “_____________________!”. That’s right. NOTHING!

          • emmetmessenger

            What does Mother Nature say about anal sex, whether a male or female?
            Why has Mother Nature created a substance, a protein, tranglutaminase,
            found in semen, with the remarkable ability of shutting down its host’s
            immune system? This is science. Not religion, nor someone’s emotional over-reaction to this highly volatile issue.This is Nature. This is the Science of the Anatomy and Physiology of the anus, rectum, penis and vagina. Study diligently and you will be amazed how quickly ignorance recapitulates to knowledge!

          • emmetmessenger

            oops, see I am also human! The word “recapituales” should be “capitulates”.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

            ha ha ha really good

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

            AIDES AIDES GOOD GOLLY GOUP

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

            WRONG WRONG READ ABOUT SODUM AND COMORE

          • Lisa Walker

            John, Please read Genesis 18:16-19:29.( Sodom and Gomorrah)
            God also said” go forth and multiply..HELLO…with 2 males or 2 females, can you multiply? I dont think so! So there you are.Satan is decieving you! Wake up people, if GOD destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for homosexuality,and dont destroy the US,he will have to apologize to them. Will he apologize? NO,GOD keeps his promises!

          • KG

            Umm…you obviously have NOT read your Bible. Sodom and Gomorrah were NOT destroyed for “homosexuality” – but for being selfish towards the poor and needy. Please read

            Ezekiel 16:49

            King James Version (KJV)

            49 Behold,
            this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and
            abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she
            strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

          Amen and another big AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • http://www.facebook.com/dave.bintliff.3 Dave Bintliff

        That is absurd. Kr, you speak like a fool. It doesn’t matter if you refer to the old or New Testament or Old Testament , homosexuality is an abomination to The Lord Jesus Christ . The bible says we ,as Christians should deny ourselves , pick up the cross and follow Jesus. So , if you are saying that modeling oneself as a homosexual is a correlation to Christianity you are grossly misread on the bible. In the book of revelations, John says that good will become good and bad will become good in the end days.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

        Stupid does as Stupid is

    • Kenyan Krusher

      Steve…..GOD BLESS YOU!!! That is fantastic!!!!

    • nc

      Steve E. the clerk of court still accepts those divorce judgments that end well over 50% of those “until death do us part” Holy Matrimonies like yours! Maybe even by the same preacher! With that success rate for Holy Matrimony I surely understand why a lot of Christian hetero couples shy away from it also> Isn’t that an over 50% group also?? I’ve been there and done that several times> You may say I am a bad heterosexual for the divorces but I’m sure as He!! a wiser one!

    • KG

      You should have realized by now that there is nothing “holy” about marriage. Marriage is a BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TWO CORPORATIONS (humans). If two gay guys want to incorporate ( get married) why not?

      Already 50% of hetero marriages in divorce. I guess heteros are afraid that if Gays get married and actually ENJOY it, it may make the heteros look bad.

      Besides, read your Bible. David and Jonathan were married. And God didn’t seem to mind.

    • emmetmessenger

      Steve, the word “holy” which is assumed to derive from the Hebrew word “kodesh”, translates, literally “separate”. As in, the Ruach hakodesh, which is the “Spirit of Separation” and truth separates one from falsehood. On the level of Ruach hakodesh, there is nothing separating man from his Creator — everything is total Oneness. “Holi” is the name of a HIndu goddess There is a Festival of Colors devoted to her. The “i” and “y” are interchangeable in the English language. Marriage derives from matrimony, which translates “mother” and “action, condition, state”.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

      Amen brother that isGood!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • KG

    You take marital advice from a guy whos been divorced three times?
    I knew Ronald Regan had Alzheimers in 1982. I’m sorry, Chip.

  • Thomas the Doubter

    Princeton defines “marriage license” as ” a license authorizing two people to marry”

    Merriam Webster defines a marriage license “a written authorization granted by
    a qualified governmental official or ecclesiastic to a named man and woman to marry.

    In a nut shell ( i specifically use the word nut referring to the powers that be, government has no business in the marriage business) as a person who wishes to get married, you must apply for, ask permission, and pay for the privilege of getting married ( not everywhere, not all the time)

    When you consider that the concept of getting a license was originally intended
    to “permit a marriage which would otherwise be illegal” (had to do with the
    waiting period call the BANNS) it comes as no shock that other forms of unqualified individuals would want to get onto the band wagon of marriage certification.(especially when governments start this state to tax law)

    A person who is a homosexual or practises as a homosexual doesn’t qualify
    neither does a person in almost every country in the world who is under age,
    mentally deficient, or a member of species ‘not his/her own’.

    There are legion, the number of reasons why this is so, and why once one of
    these perversions of a natural state, changes, all the rest will follow suit.

    I am only at odds with one thing Mr. Wood mentioned in the article and that is
    that “its inevitable”. What’s inevitable is that if gays are allowed to marry, it will turn into one really sick world, where in fact countries with higher moral outlooks will actually have the moral righteous obligation to turn this continent to ash; as everyday i awaken it looks more and more like the places referred to as “Sodom and Gomorrah” and a little nuking of a majority of the this population seems fit.

    What the law makers need to understand is that it not about allowing unqualified
    individuals to make their ‘square pegs fit round holes’, its about doing away with
    advantages to specific bodies of this social structure.

    People want to believe that there is truly something to the concept of equality, that it is applied fairly and justly and that there are no really un- fair advantages to the tax system. ( especially those who awaken to this life and see they really are different)

    If two people of the same sex can “keep it in their pants” and commit to each other, they should reap the same social rewards that two people of the opposite sex do but they sure as hell shouldn’t force their life style on the remaining society. ( the idea of two men raising children no matter how loving and thoughtful, is the crux of why all gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry, because the next fight becomes the right to adopt, ……oh is one of them going to have a uterus transplanted into themselves? guess not ! so no matter how well intended the ideas of homosexuals in their pursuit of a “HAPPY FAMILY” the very aspect of the marriage, the very natural goal of the married, the production of and reproduction of children, is you guessed it, from now until forever…… UNNATURALLY ACQUIRED PROGENY …. oh i know, maybe once they perfect
    gene manipulation, they will be able to create homosexual babies of either gender… wouldn’t it be interesting if CLONED babies of homosexuals had sexual preference for the opposite sex… would the person ask for a refund?, would he be sexually disgusted with himself?)

  • JCfromDC

    States issue marriage “licenses”, Churches perform “Sacraments of marriage”, so there is a big difference. States cannot (legally) force Churches to perform sacraments, thus violating the non-existent “separation clause” everybody carps about, otherwise the whole separation of Church and State bit goes out the window.

    Second, Rush, as much as I like him, I don’t worship him. He is the LAST person, especially for conservatives, to be making statements about “traditional marriage”, since he can’t seem to keep one together himself. What is it, FOUR divorces now?

    Third, I personally don’t give a rat’s potato WHO gets married to WHOM. I have worked in an industry where there is a very high percentage of gays/lesbians/somewhere in betweens, who probably all want the “right” to be married. From what I have seen over the years, this group (generally) is much more promiscuous than the “hetero community” (if that’s possible)and any “monogamy” is even shorter-lived than in the “straight” group, especially with gay men. (I can’t wait for the “hater” accusations and the denials over this simple fact, as I have SEEN, and been TOLD by gay men). That said, I think the ACLU and Trial Lawyers ASSn, would LOVE to have gay marriage legalized for the simple fact that divorce fees and proceedings will skyrocket in years to come. It’s a win-win for liberal politicians and the legal community.

    As already stated, I don’t give a rat’s patootie. I’m single, plan to stay that way, and can be as promiscuous as women will allow me to be. And I’m just FINE with that.

  • Ithamar

    While it will be impossible to prevent whole states from embracing sodomy as normal, states given over to sodomy as an acceptable way of life must be excised from union with those who fear God and adhere to His law as normative for social action and relations. To insist that the “United States” as it now exist is inviolable (I pledge allegiance . . . one nation, etc.) is to ensure the demise of the whole

    • Karolyn

      What about lesbians? Sodomy is not their forte.

  • TheSilverRanger

    Again, I am really so sick and tired of reading about these articles. I’m no opponent or supporter of the Defense of Marriage Act, but after seeing so many “straight married couples” in the public eye behaving badly; getting caught engaging in infidelity, getting divorced, not raising their children properly, it seems clear to me that the religious right, as well as the straight married couples really DO NOT give a damn about the sanctity of marriage. The more failed straight marriages I see, the more I support gay marriage. You want me to give a damn about straight marriages, THEN STOP GETTING DIVORCED! Don’t engage in partnerships you are not ready for. Don’t have children you’re not ready for(I love my children, but I hate my life scenarios). If you’re not happy with your significant other, then you shouldn’t have gotten married in the first place.

    • WTS/JAY

      TheSilverRanger: I’m no opponent or supporter of the Defense of Marriage Act, but after seeing so many “straight married couples” in the public eye behaving badly; getting caught engaging in infidelity, getting divorced, not raising their children properly, it seems clear to me that the religious right, as well as the straight married couples really DO NOT give a damn about the sanctity of marriage. The more failed straight marriages I see, the more I support gay marriage.

      Conversely, there are many “straight married couples” who do not behave badly in public, do not engage in infidelity, do not divorce, and who do raise their children properly…it seems clear then, that there are many married-couple who do give a damn about the sanctity of marriage and thus provide a good example to those who are considering entering into marriage. The more successful marriages i see, the more i support marriage.

      • TheSilverRanger

        Fair enough.

  • ChuckS123

    The federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) does 2 things:
    1) says that a state can refuse to honor gay marriages from another state. It generally passes it’s own state DOMA act to do so.
    2) I’m pretty sure it defines marriage between a man and a woman, but only as far as federal law is concerned, like taxes.
    Both seem within their jurisdictions. The federal law does not forbid gay marriages, just doesn’t give them some privileges.

    Incidentally, there’s no constitutional right ot any marriage – that’s left to the states.

    On the other hand, gays use laws to attack people. Some people have gone to jail in the US and I think also in Canada for swaying that homosexuality is a sin. Businesses have been fined in teh US for refusing to sell flowers, etc, for homosexual weddings.

  • WTS/JAY

    Chip: Rush Limbaugh said that allowing gay marriage in America is now “inevitable.” Do you agree?

    A rhetorical question…but yes, it’s inevitable. I say, let them have at it! For those who worry that this will pervert society; i have news for them…we are waaaay past that point…cheers!

  • Fred

    Marriage is between two people and their God or lack thereof, government should not be involved in that equation in any way shape or form. Whether or not you are married should not be of interest to the government and such information should not be required on any government form, nor the term marriage defined by government.
    There should not be any specific “rights” available to any group of people
    whom are citizens that are not available to ALL citizens, be they married,
    single, black, yellow, purple , gay, straight, young, old,
    whatever…….rights of citizens should be rights of citizens period the end
    and marriage should have nothing to do with the federal government !

    It might even help them abolish several of the useless bloated bureaucracies
    they waste all of our tax dollars on !
    …..my two pesos

  • Jim B

    As the creation of life/reproduction is the dominating goal of any species, it stands to reason that vast majority of the population will frown on those who do not abide by these laws of nature. As part of that dominating drive to create life societal and cultural foundations were formed. The foundation of life not only included the procreation, but the foundation of nurturing as well. To a large extent the foundations of life and nurturing, the catalyst of the societal and cultural development of our species, is the foundation of marriage. Therefore to give the designation of such a well-founded definition, marriage, to those who through their own choosing cannot participate in the creation of life and nurturing is an imposturous use of the word.

    • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

      Interesting position, Jim. I like it!

  • DavidL

    You keep revealing your blind spot over, and over, and over again. You really hate change and have a tough time adjusting to it. The intelligent paradigm is not left vs. right, It is constructive vs. destructive. On this issue, as in many, many others throughout our history, (to use your perspective) left is progress. Left is improved social awareness. Left is expanded freedom and liberty. It is not, as you repeatedly attempt to argue, moving socially backward and destructive. Don’t see it? Ask the interracial couples who can now marry. Ask our black Americans who can now sit at a lunch counter. Ask our gay men and women who are willing to put their life on the line for you, for me, and for our families who no longer have to lie and to hide in the shadows. Those shadows include heterosexual marriage as well as the Republican party (the phony macho party don’t you know)

    You refer to the Founding Fathers and how they would oppose same-sex-marriage. They probably would. Today they would be wrong. Remember, Chip, they were slave owners! When you were a kid, I’m guessing, you heard adults in your life using the N-word. Today you wouldn’t think of doing so because you understand why it’s wrong, dehumanizing, and offensive. You evolved! So has the country. And that’s a good thing. Like us all on various issues, you have been passed. Even though you feverishly resist such issues as marriage equality and women’s rights, the societal evolution on these matters has been positive and constructive.

    If you are against gay marriage, then don’t marry a gay. Otherwise, mind your own business. If you are against a woman’s very difficult decision to abort a child, then don’t have an abortion. Otherwise, mind your own business. If you are against a woman having control over her life and her body, then either be alone o hang out with a woman who would be will to allow you to pursue your male ego interests by dominating her. Otherwise, mind your own business.

    We have State citizenship and Federal citizenship. When equal protection and equality rights are threatened by State ignorance and discrimination, citizens have every right to pursue a redress through their Federal rights.

    • http://www.facebook.com/sharon.reeder.524 Sharon Reeder

      You are right, a least partially. Progressivism is mostly what you say but I do not see anything progressive about granting special privliges to homosexuals. We all already have the same rights, responsibilities and obligations. If left is increased social awareness then the left should stand solidly against homosexual “marriage”. With awareness of what most homosexuality really is there’s no way it can be called progressive. Just look at the statistics of that population and the numbers are dauntingly not progressve. Are they happier than others? NO. Do they stay together more than others? NO. Are they less promiscuous than others? NO. Is the % of molestations lower in that group? NO. Is crime lower? No Do they have less health problems? No I’m not saying the homosexual population is without virtues. But the balance sure isn’t there. I will grant that the situation for heteros is deteroriating but that is because of the lack of social awareness. Too much change too fast creates social stressors and paves the way for social chaos. That’s the nexus we find ourselves at today and our government is leading the way. There IS middle ground for true liberals and conservatives to work from if it’s done objectively.

      Today the Founders, who were as liberal as they got at that point in time, would be just as right as they were when establishing this nation. Less than 2% of the population does not a nation make (although gays might try if given the chance!). :-)

  • tncdel

    Gay marriage is an impossibility by definition. By definition, marriage is solely between a man and a woman.

    And a homosexual man has the EXACT SAME RIGHT under the Constitution as does a heterosexual man, no more, no less, to marry a woman. But the fact that he does not wish to avail himself of that right, which is certainly his prerogative, doesn’t create for him another right; namely: to change the heterosexual definition of marriage handed down to us by our ancestors.

    Someone posturing about “gay marriage” is sailing under a false flag built upon an invalid premise.

    And what they are really talking about is changing the heterosexual definition of marriage to include something else.

    I’m not into mysticism, so I have no religious axe to grind against homosexuals. Let each state decide as to whether or not it allows homosexual civil unions with the same legal obligations as a marriage. Just don’t call it something it’s not. And if homosexuals don’t like the sound of the term “civil union,” fine, they should invent their own word for their own type of relationships. Surely they don’t lack enough imagination to do that, right?

    • Deerinwater

      That true Tnc Del ~ until you start using the most recent edition . ~ As Rush has pointed out ~ The word “marriage” has under went a make over.

  • Respect Freedom

    It’s all this Bible-talk that seriously leaves me scratching my head regarding this nationwide debate.

    For one thing, just because the Bible defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and only between those two, does not mean that everyone should or must adhere to it. There are many other religions represented in this country other than Christianity, such as Islam, Buddhism, etc. On top of that, and contrary to widely popular belief, America was NOT founded as a Christian nation. It has not instituted or named an official national religion, and for good reason. The Union, later to be called the United States of America, was formed by those who were being pressured to comply with the laws of England, which were newly redrafted to instill the “national” Church of England. America was founded to give it’s citizens not only a freedom of choice, but a freedom of speech and freedom of religious beliefs and values.

    Even the first Amendment of the Constitution states:
    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceable to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

    I’m not here to bash Christians, or the institution of Christianity. I was baptized Catholic and raised in a God-fearing environment. I went to private Christian schools throughout my childhood and teenage years. I have respect for the religion, the values and morals that it instills in its followers. But I have also learned, through the teachings of Jesus Christ, that it is wrong to display negativity to or attempt to prohibit ungodly beliefs or actions of others who may not be followers of the same religious institution that you follow. “Love thy neighbor.”

    It is my personal belief, and the belief of many countless others I have observed and/or come in contact with myself, that the definition of marriage can go either way, and whichever way it goes, one group of people will be upset about it, so it’s a pointless debate. If the Christians are so hard-pressed about how homosexuals are poisoning our “Christian nation,” it’s simple enough to just make the argument that since the definition of marriage by God is a “sacred” institutional definition, that word “sacred” is enough to deem the definition of marriage a religious issue, therefore making government involvement completely unconstitutional.

    On the other hand, for those who understand there is a separation of Church and state for a reason, if the federal government or state governments still wish to define the LEGAL definition of marriage, as it only applies to judicial branches and court magistrates (who issue marriage licenses and can perform state-recognized marriages outside of the Church) and does not apply or adhere to any priest, Church, or other religious institution, they can and should be able to define marriage as between any two people, male or female, to instill a marriage between themselves that is legally recognized by that state or jurisdiction, as religion and the sacred definition of marriage does not apply to the state government.

    If homosexuals are, at some point in the future, allowed to marry, get over it. Yes, you’re a Christian. Yes, you follow the laws and teachings of God and his Son. No, that does not give you the right to imply to the rest of the world that your beliefs and your religion and your God are at the tip of the pillar. You are not alone in your faith and your beliefs, and that should be enough. People who follow other religions and have their own faith and their own beliefs probably think the same way about you as you do of them, which is ridiculous. You can’t change others, and you refuse to be changed, as they do, so have respect for the rights, the free wills, and the wishes of others, even if those don’t necessarily run parallel to your own.

    If you really hate all that is happening THAT much, and literally cannot, with even just an ounce of your being, tolerate any of the changes that are being considered, you are more than welcome to either 1) leave the country or 2) run for President of the United States.

    Other than that… learn some respect, as you should have done growing up Christian; reach down into other innocent peoples’ throats to get your Bibles back, and understand that this is a free nation. Not everyone will agree with others’, and not everyone will certainly agree or stand behind some of the laws, regulations or other decisions made by our government. Do some more research on the founding of this nation, and you’ll hopefully realize that the union of all of us, despite the disagreement on multiple issues, was the beauty behind the institution of the United States in the first place.

  • TML

    Same-sex marriage between consenting adults harms no one physically or financially. The government role should be limited to recognizing marriages between such as legitimate, rather than deciding who can and who cannot enter into a marriage contract, by defining it through law in a way which respects religion. At the same time the government cannot make laws which would force religious institutions to perform marriage. Yes… it is inevitable, and yes, DOMA is unconstitutional.

  • ridge runner

    Since Whore Willy Clinton says he is sorry for signing the DOMA. Since the marxist muslim and the rapist are so close, both must have thing for young boys over in the pedophile worshipping countries. Time for States to take back the power from the beltway pukes and the facist communist Dems.. .

  • kr

    Hey Kenya lusher the only thing you’ve probably crushed is your pathetic little penis while standing over the toilet. You knew nothing about the gay lifestyle.

  • Karolyn

    Now with this new platform, at least half the comments are missing, Bob Livingston.

  • Kevin Wickham

    I do not see where it makes a difference one way or the other. This is about what the state recognizes as legal, not what your church will allow. In the USA we have freedom of religion and even no religion if the person so chooses (I myself am a Christian, but that is just me). However, there is no state mandated religion (Thank God) so this whole gay marriage thing is a lot of talk over nothing in my eyes. If you ask me (and I notice no one has) if you “allow” people to be gay, you pretty much have to “allow” them to get married if they wish (as far as state legalities not your personal religion are concerned).

    • Karolyn

      Sounds like common sense to me. Unfortunately, common sense is not at play here.

  • JUKEBOX

    I say that if a gay couple can procreate and produce a child without any artificial or experimental concept, then they can prove they might be eligible to marry. I never heard of anybody getting pregnant on spit.

    • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

      JUKEBOX, it will NEVER happen.

      God PERSONALLY designed and created MARRIAGE and His definition of MARRIAGE aka FAMILY is: ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN aka Ish (husband) and Isha (wife) (Gen.1:27; 2:7, 18-25; 5:1)

      1) God created MAN and WOMAN one for other.
      “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; MALE and FEMALE He created them.” (Genesis 1:27)

      “And the Lord God said: “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper SUITABLE for him … He brought HER [female] to the man…” (Genesis
      2:18)

      2) Man breaks his bond with his parents and bonds with his WIFE.
      Their relation is glued. HUSBAND and WIFE no longer two, but ONE* FLESH:

      “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be JOINED TO HIS WIFE, and THEY SHALL BECOME ONE* FLESH. And they were both naked, the MAN and HIS WIFE (not his ‘husband’), and were not ashamed.” (Genesis 2:24-25)

      * JUKEBOX, I hope you know how MAN and WOMAN become ONE FLESH.

      Yes, exactly: Man (Penis) + Woman (Vagina), NOT Penis and Mouth or Penis and Anal Hole with feces.

      3) God BLESSED MARRIAGE ONLY and ONLY between ONE MAN and ONE
      WOMAN — HETEROSEXUAL COUPLE. Only HETEROSEXUAL COUPLE (Penis and Vagina) can produce offspring – make children.

      “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; MALE and FEMALE He created them. Then God BLESSED THEM, and God
      said to them, “Be FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY” (Genesis 1:27, 28)

      “In the day that God created MAN, He made him in the likeness of God. He CREATED THEM MALE and FEMALE, and BLESSED THEM and called them Mankind in the day they were created.” (Genesis 5:1-2)

      4) Jesus confirms the strength of the marriage unity: What God has joined, NO MEN SHALL SEPARATE. (Mt.19:4-6)

      The sexual UNITY of MAN (Penis) & WOMAN (Vagina) is absolute TRUTH of the Law of Nature as well.

      The homos are using their bodies not for what they were designed.
      It does not matter if you believe in the Creation or evolution, the Human body
      was not created for the sexual perversion.

      The Homosexual behavior is UNNATURAL, IMMORAL and UNHEALTHY.

      MARRIAGE = ONE MAN (He) + ONE WOMAN (She) = FAMELY!!!!!!!!!!!!

      HOMOSEXUALITY is a MENTAL DISORDER aka Psychological Pathology!!!!!

      “Let each man have his own WIFE, and let each woman have her own HUSBAND. Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.” (1Corinthians 7)

  • Deerinwater

    WOW! ~ this new format ~ is sort of tricky ~ I left to do some research mid post ~ and lost my work. ~ It’s gone. I wonder if they can fix that in the future? ~ The only way around that , that I know of is to craft a post on a word document and then copy and paste your final posting.

    And Alondra ~ Hillary is many things, but a “whore” is not one of them ~Okay?

    Speak the truth as you know it to be and I will respect you for it.

    As for Ms. Clinton’s change in position. ~ that happens ~ and not exclusive to a single party or person. ~ Remember ole “Read my Lips”? ~~ and just last week we heard of a GOP politician changing his position on Gay Marriage ~ after some soul searching with the “breaking news” that his 20 plus years old son was a swishy boy. ~ No doubt, that was a turd in his punch bowel.

    I’d locate it and pull it up for you ~but fear i’d lose my post. ~ having already done so once.

    And Ringgo, Karolyn does not post ignorant post, ~ nor does her post hateful and demeaning post ~ and she sure does not instruct other poster to where she thinks they need to go.

    But I do! You can go straight to hell a$$hole.

    • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

      “Is the fact that Huma was never seen twice in the same designer outfit and lived in a $649,000 condo explainable because she was trading sexual favors with Hillary for a fabulous lifestyle?” “If so what does that make Huma?”

      “How did Huma, whose government salary was listed as $9,999, live as she did?”

      “Is Hillary Clinton a lesbian?”

      Is Huma Abedin her lesbian “kept woman?”

      In 2007 Michael Musto a Village Voice columnist who writes about gay issues commented that Hillary might be “Gayle King-ing” Huma, that is getting her a higher profile in order to head off media scrutiny about her and why Clinton would be “hiding” Huma and the true nature of their relationship.

      In her tell all book about her affair with Bill Clinton Gennifer Flowers wrote that when she asked Bill if Hillary is a lesbian he laughed and made reference to her being more experienced WITH WOMEN then he is.

      The purpose of this essay is NOT to prove Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin are lesbians, but to raise the question: If they are daughters of Sapphoswouldn’t it have been a good deal for Anthony Weiner to become Huma’s beard or faux husband?

      • Bob666

        Yo Swine Fever,
        Was that from one of those fictional emails or a right wing fiction site that you like to visit???

    • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

      Sorry Darwan, but besides “many things” she is a WHORE.
      I’ll call a SPADE a SPADE and a WHORE a WHORE. And hillary is a bi-sexual WHORE.

      Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton was said to have a lesbian relationship
      with her aide, Huma Abedin.

      But her lesbianism goes back to Arkansas.

      “Hillary’s lesbian affairs, of which go back to Arkansas when it was reported that Vince Foster covered for her at the Rose Law Firm, then again at the White House.

      • Deerinwater

        Well Alondra, ~ if that was true ~ it would only make her a lesbian.

  • Kinetic1

    Everyone is so wrapped up in the rights of the Church, the power of the Feds and the rights of the States that we seem to be missing the basic problem here: marriage, when recognized by the Federal Government confers on such couples certain rights that would otherwise be denied. Whether your Church or your State recognize such a union is of little importance so long as the Federal Government recognizes it. The problem is, if a State refuses to recognize a homosexual marriage from another state, then the Feds will not recognize the marriage either. Address this problem and the rest will work it’s self out.

  • Toy Pupanbai

    Another subversion of our cultural heritage.
    I’m, as a hetero am beginning l that I’m an endangered species!

    • Deerinwater

      And you were born that way and had no choice in the matter. ~ Somewhere between 4 to 8% are born homosexual and just like you, ~ it was “not” a choice that they made. ~ Wrong brain in the wrong body, a random selection of nature.

      This is nature at work ~ and for us to deal with it ~ like we do everything else when nature plays her dirty, mean tricks. ~~ That it does not directly affect 90% of the population ~ it’s been rather easy to just ignore.

  • blackey

    its adam and eve not adam and steve.

    • Deerinwater

      And without ~ incest behavior where did everyone come from?

  • Roger

    ONLY INDIVIDUALS should define Marriage,NOT the State and NOT the Fed or ANY govenment level-PERIOD. Either by a written “Marital Agreement”,Religious institution or the State etc. and between same or opposite sexes…..The CHOICE should be left to the individual

  • WTS/JAY

    Marriage is a “relational-existence”; in and of itself, flawless. However, the same cannot be said of “human-nature” and therein lies the problem!

  • emmetmessenger

    What is the definition of matrimony, which marriage derives from?

    matrimony (n.) c.1300, from Old French matremoine “matrimony, marriage” and directly from Latin matrimonium “wedlock, marriage,” from matrem (nominative mater) “mother” (see mother (n.1)) + -monium, suffix signifying “action, state, condition.”
    Interesting, “mother” and “action, condition, state” and what might that be describing? Perhaps pregnancy? Are we going to alter the true definition of a word to please a group of people? Why cannot they just be joined and have all the privileges and rights of a married couple? If we choose to redefine marriage, we are being dishonest and have sacrificed integrity.

    • Deerinwater

      ” Why cannot they just be joined and have all the privileges and rights of a married couple? ” ~ Because laws, rules and prevailing attitudes restrict them from having them. ~ So hence ~ a new law.

  • emmetmessenger

    Reggie Billiot Is it the “tyranny of” nature that created “tranglutaminase”, a protein only found in semen that has the remarkable ability to shut down its host’s immune system, either male or female? I suggest that you add some knowledge to your ignorance for this very good reason: public ignorance is government’s bliss.

  • Dave

    It is clear from the conservative responses that they are not happy unless they get to control other people’s lives and force their religious views on others. They are probably cheering the state of NC’s attempt to do away with the 1st Amendment.
    It is so sad that these people are stuck in the era that supported salvery and for women not to have the right to vote. But that is conservatism for you.

  • Native Blood

    This should be considered a social issue and non-politicized. Runs right down with abortion and amnesty. None of the three should be even considered by the congress and the senate. They are a waste of the government resources and the courts have already made decisions in these matters. If gays wanna marry, they should be held responsible financially as any other mate or parent. Subject to the same domestic violence laws (for gun restriction) and one of the gay couple must legally assume the title “wife” so there is a defined beneficiary of benefits, custodial parent, and all the same hardships heterosexual couples have to endure. Along with all the new found equality, the hate crime protection is sorta mundane don’t you think?

    • Bob666

      Yo Native,

      Well Stated!

  • Justin M.

    People really need to rethink themselves if marriage freedom is out of the question and they claim to be advocates of FREEDOM. It may disturb you and contrast your religion, but if you love the hell out of FREEDOM, then it should be a no-brainer.

  • L.L.E.

    I believe it should be some kind of negotiation where their partner should receive its companion’s wealth , in case of death or separation. BUT BY ALL MEANS “ABSOLUTELY THERE IS NO ROOM FOR MARRIAGE WHITIN SAME SEX GENDER”
    We should not subsidy them!

  • Tru liberty

    The part of the Bible that speaks against homosexuality was misinterpreted and is actually referring to male prostitution within the temple.

  • Doubtful Avenger

    Gee, I didn’t know we had 51 Republican Senators, did you?

  • rbrooks

    ban all mythology. it is the very root of all evil, hate and violence.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782139066 Joseph Eddie Gaspard

    It would seem like not only the Gays have come out of the closet ,used to be America used to the land of the brave don’t seem like its going to be that way any more give them an inch they will take the hole country first they took God out of the country now the Gays have taken over even in the white house doesn’t deserve a capital any more, I am sure according to the Bible That God is looking down on America but” then they took him out of America so why should he care ,as he said I will turn you over to a reprobate mind of those who lust after their own kind (Same Sex) Marriage but then again if you don’t believe God exist , I would reather believe

    that he exist and find out that he doesn’t then to find that he does. Oh” well who care they are in the same group that the 14% is in, I am sure I will get a lot of nasty comments back so flip a quarter . and go for it .and another thing God created Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve
    Bye for JEG Of Louisiana.

  • tncdel

    Gay marriage is an impossibility by definition. By definition, marriage is solely between a man and a woman.

    And a homosexual man has the EXACT SAME RIGHT under the Constitution as does a heterosexual man, no more, no less, to marry a woman. But the fact that he does not wish to avail himself of that right, which is certainly his prerogative, doesn’t create for him another right; namely: to change the heterosexual definition of marriage handed down to us by our ancestors.

    Someone posturing about “gay marriage” is sailing under a false flag built upon an invalid premise.

    And what they are really talking about is changing the heterosexual definition of marriage to include something else.

    I’m not into mysticism, so I have no religious axe to grind against homosexuals. Let each state decide as to whether or not it allows homosexual civil unions with the same legal obligations as a marriage. Just don’t call it something it’s not. And if homosexuals don’t like the sound of the term “civil union,” fine, they should invent their own word for their own type of relationships. Surely they don’t lack enough imagination to do that, right?

  • Doug

    These gays are mentally ill. They were considered mentally ill until the 70s when the liberals started their brainwashing tactics to get it considered a “lifestyle”. I have spoken to various medical people on the subject and they agree, these people have mental problems. So this marriage thing only encourages them to act on their illness.

  • Fred

    Marriage, in it’s true form, is a covenant between two people and their God (or lack thereof ). The entire “issue” in the marriage issue is GOVERNMENT. Government should neither recognize or define marriage. Government should not be in the marriage business. There should not be any box to check on a government form that that states you are married, unmarried, divorced, single, annulled or likewise.

    • Elton Robb

      Correct. It’s not the state’s business to worry about who is with whom.

  • Elton Robb

    Blaming others for your problems is mysticism. Blaming god for your problems is mysticism. Blaming god for your sexuality is mysticism. Taking responsibility for yourself while seeking God’s friendship — priceless.

  • Elton Robb

    God wants us to use our powers of reason and empathy to do good to all mankind. Thinking for yourself is the first step, thinking about what you can do for others is the next step. Seeking God’s friendship is becoming like God to attract his presence. Rebellion is being like something other than god and attracting the others’ presence.

    Marriage is defined as a covenant between you and God and your wife (or wives, if you enter into lawful Plural Marriage like one should if they are to become like God). In Genesis, God said that a man may leave his parents to be his wife and they shall be one flesh. Woman has been built to need a man, and man needs a woman. Semen has chemicals in it that can soothe a woman’s moods. A man needs a woman to feel spiritually complete.

    In Genesis, the Father declared that its not good for a man to be alone, so he created Woman from his rib (allegorically) so the two can live life side by side and together. A “homosexual” relationship cannot fulfill a man’s or a woman’s need for true companionship. This is why homosexual marriages falls apart and the typical young homosexual male has fornicated with more than one hundred partners before his High School graduation.

    In Leviticus and Deuteronomy, it’s been said that Homosexuals should be killed in order to remove the evil from the house of Israel. Jesus is still of that opinion. However, we aren’t imprisoning them much less executing them. So God unfortunately has to do it (it’s much better if Homosexuals are given a trial and thrown in prison by our society than handing execution duties over to God. It’s not pretty — http://talklikeaphysicist.com/2008/motionless-monday-amazing-pictures-of-nuclear-blasts/ ).

    Gays are everywhere. And God will have to kill them for our own good, lest the whole of the Human Race is extinguished in the name of Equality and Civil Rights. And like I said, its not pretty. Another thing about marriage, since Women’s Lib has basically turned the value of a man around in a woman’s mind; God is going to have to change their minds. Most of us men will be taken away from our women and God will give our women to other men when they realize the value of a man. And the United States’ society will be opposite of that of China’s right now: America’s ratio of men to women will be 1 man for every 7 women.

    Not only that, but if we adopt this measure, our enemies will descend upon us like a locust plague and there will be nothing to stop them this time. The world will no longer stomach us and we will be worthy of the conquering sword arm. Many of our liberal friends will be killed but many others will be taken into captivity in the lands of Russia and China and sold into slavery, to live under the government they want to live. As slaves. As communist slaves.

    We will not prevail against our invaders until we realize from whom our strength actually comes from and we turn to him and seek his face. And when we do, we will have a battle commander and leader who will drive out our enemies and establish peace in the land forever more.

  • smithpae

    Does nobody read history anymore? Government sponsored marriage was an unholy alliance of church and state to ensure that the rich could pass their wealth on to their children. It began in medieval France. The sooner we get government out of the relationship business, the sooner society can return to being civil. read:
    http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Knight_the_Lady_and_the_Priest.html?id=cIwUUYH4E3oC