Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

I'm very interested in what you think of the replies from "Elias Tolkien" and "Veritas Aequitas". See the link.
1 posted on 02/19/2011 6:56:56 PM PST by mbeaven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: mbeaven

Same sex marriage is like a square circle, intrinsically contradictory in its definition.


2 posted on 02/19/2011 7:06:08 PM PST by reg45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mbeaven
Is banning “gay marriage” discrimination?

Only if banning perversion is discrimination. ;-)

3 posted on 02/19/2011 7:08:47 PM PST by doc1019
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mbeaven

One of the lines they used here in IN recently, when the marriage amendment passed the House, was that they were “writing hate speech into the States constitution”


4 posted on 02/19/2011 7:20:09 PM PST by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mbeaven

Well, when you redefine the word “marriage” and “discrimination” and for that matter “banning”, then, yes, I guess it could be.


5 posted on 02/19/2011 7:29:11 PM PST by Tanniker Smith (I didn't know she was a liberal when I married her.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mbeaven

“You are free to marry someone of the opposite gender, and the law is applied equally to all people....”

I think they tried that argument in LovIng and it did not work.

And when the question goes to the SCOTUS, the decision will be in the hands of Justice Kennedy.


7 posted on 02/19/2011 8:01:09 PM PST by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mbeaven

No, so-called same sex marriage is not discrimination. Marriage, in the legal sense, is a state-licensed method of starting a new family. Historically, it gave a man some measure of certainty that children born to his wife were really his, and it was the lynchpin of inheritance customs and laws. Today, simply because women can get pregnant through artifcial means, and paternity is easy to determine by DNA testing, it is no excuse to extend the legal definition of marriage beyond one man and one woman. I’d rather see the state get out of the business of licensing marriage than see the definition of marriage extended beyond one man and one woman.


8 posted on 02/19/2011 8:12:40 PM PST by Wolfstar ("If you would win a man to your cause, first convince him that you are his friend." Abraham Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mbeaven
The freeks have been trying for decades to push this issue to be
on par with racism. The left tries to make every issue on the same level as Racism.
And that's a matter of fact.

God will judge them all accordingly. Man can only keep them away from our children.

9 posted on 02/19/2011 8:18:33 PM PST by MaxMax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mbeaven; humblegunner; Larry Lucido; 50mm; Salamander; TheOldLady; Markos33; Eaker; Allegra; ...
"I'm very interested in what you think of the replies from "Elias Tolkien" and "Veritas Aequitas". See the link."

If you really are interested in what people think of the stuff on your blog, then why don't you post it here?

Or is that not as profitable as excerpting, making up deceptive, inflammatory titles and bragging about how many clicks per hour you can generate?
10 posted on 02/19/2011 8:41:17 PM PST by shibumi (I am The Nexus One - I want more life, Baby I aint done!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mbeaven

Marriage itself is too regulated by the government to the point where it’s not an official declaration of two people sharing each other’s property and leaving the other as the prime beneficiary of somebody’s property after they die. The left turned marriage into a wealth transfer program.


11 posted on 02/19/2011 8:48:28 PM PST by NorthStarStateConservative (I'm just another disabled naturalized minority vegan pro life conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mbeaven
Think of it in terms of constitutionality:

Think of it in terms of mathematical equality:

Think of it in terms of procreation:


13 posted on 02/19/2011 10:16:08 PM PST by conservativeimage ("Uh, let me be clear. Uh." - President Barack Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mbeaven
I'm very interested in what you think of the replies from "Elias Tolkien" and "Veritas Aequitas".

Then you should post them here.

Or is there something bad about them? Porn maybe? Bad language?

16 posted on 02/20/2011 12:37:03 AM PST by humblegunner (Blogger Overlord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mbeaven; shibumi

So it’s “consider and hear me, but not here, over there where I can get blog hits.”


17 posted on 02/20/2011 3:40:37 AM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mbeaven; shibumi; humblegunner; Larry Lucido; 50mm; Salamander; DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis; ...

I’m very interested in why you think that people on a conservative forum are as fixated as you are on the homosexual agenda.


18 posted on 02/20/2011 5:11:59 AM PST by TheOldLady ("I am optimistic... [and] greatly heartened by the response of America in 2010..." - Lazamataz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mbeaven
See the link

Why not post it here.

24 posted on 02/20/2011 5:55:25 PM PST by 50mm ( I don't use drugs, my dreams are frightening enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson