Skip to comments.Should social conservatives abandon the phrase “traditional marriage”?
Posted on 10/11/2013 9:24:17 PM PDT by Collegiate Theist
It seems like any time someone wishes to express their opposition to the redefinition of marriage, they start by extolling the virtues of so-called traditional marriage. In doing so, their intentions are undoubtedly to explain why it is that succumbing to the push for a more inclusive definition of marriage would be harmful to society. Their choice of words, though, may very well hinder their argument....
Whole article: http://collegiatetheist.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/should-social-conservatives-abandon-the-phrase-traditional-marriage/
(Excerpt) Read more at collegiatetheist.wordpress.com ...
The phrase traditional marriage does not hinder my argument. It hinders THEIRS.
Pipes get bent....so should they.
Should idiots stop writing articles like this.... read the rest at my blog....
As far as homo marriage goes, my church won't recognize it. I'll leave that to the Anglicans and Henry the VIII's descendants.
Traditional marriage is marriage in accordance with Natural Law. It is heterosexual.
government cannot “get out of it”
who do certain benefits go to is a big thing since the government is the largest employer in the country
Yep, even the question is stupid.
Why should conservatives constantly be asked to surrender?
What is the alternative word or phrase that you propose we use?
Let the gub’mint allow “civil unions” and leave “traditional marriage” and holy matrimony to the church. Remember, like the libs say, “separation of church and state”!
Historically, social embracement of homosexuality and sexual deviancy has been the downfall of virtually every great civilization. We saw it with the ancient Greeks and the Roman Empire.
America is going to be the next great civilization to fall if we continue on our current liberal path to obscurity.
“Those who do not know their history are condemned to repeat it.”
So, “civil union” benefits for gays and no marriage benefits for anyone else?
Which needs to change.
Start by eliminating the TSA, BATF, IRS, EPA, most of the executive branch, (and I can go on and on)
Since there is no government church in America, your argument is to end marriage as humans know it and just let everyone create their own definitions, which of course, the government will still have to recognize as it has throughout history.
Marriage has always had a legal definition whether it was from the Greeks or Romans or Sharia law or Catholic law for a while, or tribal law, or whatever, marriage and families and death and divorce lead to the need for law.
Welcome to FR.
Excellent point! The Catholic Church has addressed this issue by standing on the condition of marriage as it is in the Catholic Church, as one of The Seven Sacraments.
Catholics enter into the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony and always have. This means it is not a gimmic, produced out of thin air to meet a threat. It is ancient, in the Church.
Thus, reliance on the Freedom of Religion clause will enhance their defense of marriage on proven and crystal clear religious grounds.
Given their reluctance to recognize a Catholic divorce, they will be seen as quite credible on their serious view of “marriage”.
The regime has successfully made a mockery of all things “traditional”, already.
It’s probably too late. There’s no greater symbol of America’s cultural decline into the sewer than embracing the abject deviancy of homo marriage. An America that embraces this is not an America worth saving.
Any reason for excerpting your material?
/ hat tip to the blogger overlord who is currently on break and a side ping for popcorn.
How about “real marriage”?
Which has nothing to do with anything, except your personal feelings or your personal church members, the Mosque, or the Gay Church of the Goats may have different internals, it isn't law.
You do mention what should be a well known point though, people can and always could, call whatever they wanted, "marriage" between themselves or their group or within their church, the Mormons do today for instance they marry dead people, but it isn't legal so who cares?
Society and the government has to know what a legal marriage is.
I don’t know about the term ‘traditional marriage’, but they definitely should stop using the word ‘gay’.
I try to avoid using the term ‘traditional marriage’ when I can.
It implies that there is some sort of non-traditional marriage, which there isn’t.
There is only one type of marriage, and everything else is just a delusional attempt to make disturbed people feel normal.
If I have a real Rolex watch (I wish) and you have a fake one that you got at a market somewhere, I don’t say that my Rolex is ‘traditional’.
No, my Rolex is a damn Rolex, and you’re an idiot with a fake piece of crap around your wrist.
“...If I have a real Rolex watch (I wish) and you have a fake one that you got at a market somewhere, I dont say that my Rolex is traditional.
No, my Rolex is a damn Rolex, and youre an idiot with a fake piece of crap around your wrist.”
Bingo ! ! !
This Wittgensteinian use of Language-—is to control “perceptions”. He who controls the words determine the “worldview”. The Marxist control over publications and media-—and schools (USDOE) is to control worldview-—erase the Individualism in Christianity-—to erase Christian Ethics. (to collapse culture).
In using the term-—”traditional” marriage-—you are stating that there are other legitimate types of “marriages”-—so you are normalizing the idea that there are all sorts of possible “marriages”. Same with putting “homosexual” in front of the word “marriage”-—it normalizes the irrational concept—esp. in children. What was odd—becomes normal after decades of using that term.
Same with the word “gender”. It is to open up the possibility of more than just boy and girl (now they have “its” in Sweden—genderless children) (irrational/removal of Reason/Natural Law(Science) from the minds of children.......it is like the word “partner”-—to destroy the concepts of wife and husband-—words eradicated in “new” children’s books decades ago to normalize the concept of non-married couples living together.
Whether you realize this or not-—worldview is created by language-—by the emotions tied to the words-—and they use “operate conditioning” on ALL CHILDREN in public school (embedded in the Billy Ayers curricula) and in TV shows-—which will elicit the “correct” emotion (one permitted) which is tied to a concept——like sodomy = Good/Right and Chrisitanity = Bigot/hater. These concepts are in their literature/questions/history lessons-—everything-—math “problems” and their “sex ed” which will destroy Virtue in children.
I am reading “Sex Education: the Final Plague”. It outlines how Sex Ed was inserted into public and private schools over the last 70 years—and by whom—evil Atheist/Sodomites/Satanists/Marxists—who all want to destroy Christian Ethics-—because it uses Natural Law and Reason and Individual Rights from God. Can’t have that in unjust/slave societies.
Literally-—Sex Ed during Latency and post-Latency erases morality in those exposed to “Sex Ed” which promotes perversions and unnatural ideas which they embed in children to normalize evil as good. Flips morality-—to the using of the body as an object (means to an end) which is slavery/prostitution/homosexuality-—all dehumanizes and leads to nihilism and the destruction of culture—for totalitarian state.
I always thought he word “queer” was apt.
I really resent them co-opting the word “gay.”
How does it make sense to abandon a term 100% of people understand?
That’s a great picture. Horrific without being a horrible or sleazy picture. I will use sweet little OG in one of my games.
Do you recall where you found it?
There’s real, conjugal, natural law marriage.
And then there’s fake, non-conjugal, unnatural, erzatz, government-defined marriage.
See you, ZOT Hole...
What’s wong with you?
Why do you have such a hard time accepting absolutes in the face of ambiguity?
Welcome to FR.
Make your point by publishing the entire article on FR. We don’t like leaving the compound to service alternate agencies.
I hope you have a good point to make concerning semantics.
>> I think government should get out of marriage and leave it to the churches
I completely agree.
>> A Mod Lecture Series
>> What is the alternative word or phrase that you propose we use?
Yes, they were helpful and inspirational.
>> So, civil union benefits for gays and no marriage benefits for anyone else?
I propose society take the risk of leaving marriage to Faith allowing private industry to market its wares according to any criteria it deems practical without involvement of the iron fist.
Another in the mod lecture series.
Since Oct 11, 2013
sorry, I was not aware that doing so was frowned upon. Is there any way to edit/delete a thread once it’s posted?
Thanks, sorry. I wasn’t aware of this when I posted. Is there a way to delete the thread now?
Well said. This was my point exactly.
Can someone help me edit or delete the original post?
Internet search for “Lovecraft” images.
You are doomed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.