Same Sex Marriage
Again with the same sex marriage issue. Spurned by the ridiculous argument found at
http://politicalchatter.today.com/2008/06/23/same-sex-marriage
Sir, it is not fear that causes people to reject gay marriage or to speak openly against the union of a man and a man or a woman and a woman. It is our desire to stand up for truth. Nature never intended there to be same sex marriages.
You state that the “mantra of the conservatives has been to protect the sanctuary of marriage”, and that you “find the objections to same sex marriage baffling”. You don’t think that that same sex unions “destroy the value of marriage”. That “anti-same sex movement is a group of individuals determined to oppose their beliefs on others”. Resulting in “more government intrusion into the lives of the people” and “increasing the police power of the state for self-defined morality is worth it?”
I respectfully disagree with you. Let’s start with the last argument and move forward. Banning same-sex marriages does not require police power to enforce. So your argument of government suppression is ludicrous. No military or police force would be necessary. Its a matter of can an authorized individual marry or not marry a couple. If the act is not authorized, then in the eyes of the law, they are not married and have non of the rights or privileges that come with marriage. You talk about fear, your argument is based on the sole purpose of inciting fear of government suppression.
Now for your argument that the movement is based on a group of individuals determined to oppose the beliefs of others. This is utterly false. The argument is that we don’t want your beliefs enforced upon us. Marriage has always been between a man and a woman. You can’t be the victim here. We are the victims of your attempt to change the definition of marriage to include same sex relations. So our stance is to protect how marriage is, from your attempt to change things; so you can’t be oppressed or the victim.
So your talk of fear from the conservatives is incorrect and a lie. You are the one trying to incite fear, first by a false claim of being the victim, and second by appealing towards the peoples fear of government suppression.
This is a bit ridiculous. Your argument I mean. Laws that suppress a person’s ability to live free of government control is an essential right to freedom and privacy. The whole police-power is a reference to a “police state” - you know, like the one that the U.S. took out in Iraq, despite it being a sovereign nation. Also, no beliefs are imposed upon you - if it is legal doesn’t mean that you are required to marry someone of the same sex. It has nothing to do with imposing beliefs, but allowing people to have their own beliefs and practice those beliefs. Finally, “marriage” is defined as “to wed” - see, there is nothing about the sex of the people being married. You connotation is one that is most likely brought on from a religious belief (which, by the way you have the freedom to believe because there is no law restricting the belief of any religion - funny how that works with this topic: freedom of expression). Finally, marriage is a religious institution, which would mean that the government has no right to regulate or condone. That means that marriage shouldn’t be anywhere in law - it should all be civil unions.
You seem angry about this topic. I hope that I could enlighten you about the suggestions that you’ve proposed.
“laws that suppress a person’s ability to live free of government control is an essential right to freedom and privacy”
False. Serg, laws exist to protect the freedom of the majority. Under your argument Thieves could claim their freedom to steal is restricted. Stealing is something they do in private.
“nothing to do with imposing beliefs, but allowing people to have their own beliefs and practice those beliefs”
Then go to your lawmakers and seek the legal right to do so. The underlying issue here, taking California as the example is that the Majority of people want marriage to be between a man and a woman, yet activist judges have gone against the will of the people.
“government has no right to regulate or condone [marriage]”
False. Government has the right to enact laws and regulate anything that can have an impact on our society.
You may want to read it a little closer. I didn’t say “laws suppress” - I said “laws that suppress.” But you are right, there is a problem there with how I worded that. Laws are there to protect everyone. The problem with your claim to protect the majority, is that the majority could, at some point, be thieves. What then?
But why do they want to restrict people? “Same, but equal” is the argument that was used when schools were segregated and it was never equal. It doesn’t work if we want a society of equality. What you are talking about is a new form of segregation. California, actually, will have the right to vote on the initiative this November, so they’ll have the chance to overturn that law.
Finally, let me quote: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” - Regulating marriage violates the U.S. Constitution by ‘respecting’ the establishment of marriage.
I would differ on your defination of the police power of the state. You summerized only the act, the police power is more than military action or police, it involves the action of passing laws. Forcing a narrow defination of marriage via the use of government laws, is utilizing the police power of the state.
Supporting same sex marriage is not importing ideas upon anyone. It is allowing for others to make a choice, which is the essence of freedom, the ability to choose, so long as it is not impeding the rights of others. I am not a gun owner, but I certainly support the right of others to purchase a gun.
Lastly, I am not a liberal, but someone who loves freedom and is willing to support it even when I disagree with an act…I would invite you to my blog and read my other posts.
aebersole, I have read some of your other posts, many of which I can relate to. I enjoyed your post on “Who is Obama?”. I just don’t agree with your stance on gay marriage. We can still be friends though. Cheers!
Same sex marriages mean equal rights for everyone not just some. It is the people that insist on spreading hate and discrimination that is the reason for so many murders in schools and on the streets. Feel free to stop by and read more of my words at http://gaylesbianlifestyle.today.com
I look forward to your views. Don’t forget to read about NATURE and then DIVERSITY.
Blondie, marriage was never intended to be a union between same sex couples. Why do you play the hate and discrimination card? Does being the victim help you gain more support for your cause? Does it help you deal with the guilt you face each day for doing something you know deep down inside to be wrong?
“spreading hate and discrimination that is the reason for so many murders in schools and on the streets”.
You made a huge leap there, from anti gay marriage to murderers.
I’d have to say the reason for crime and murders is that too many children grow up in homes without fathers and mothers. A father and a mother that love each other and raise their children to respect other people and honor the laws of this land is the BEST way to reduce the crime and murders in this country.
gay marriage will only lead to more calamity in this land.