Posted on 11/04/2015 8:58:46 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
***PING***
Because they don’t want their Democrat friends calling them “bigots”
Because a lot of RINO-publicans love any sort of big government they can get like their corrupt counterparts/compatriots.
“But ‘marriage’ exists for the purpose of creating families and providing a stable environment for the raising of children- and deep down, everybody knows it”
And maintaining civilization by the commitment of a man and a woman to be together as one.
Marriage has great value even without children.
Because they know it’s not possible. As long as government is in the marriage dissolution business it will be in the marriage business.
I agree- I am in a childless marriage and surely feel it worthwhile
In other words, you want us to surrender.
Also, stop calling it “gay marriage.”
“The arguments I make for marriage and family are straightforward, even plain. Central planners have always understood that when you legally isolate people, you can better control them. Take away the sanctuaries of marriage and family, and you take away everybody’s privacy and autonomy. The state zooms into that vacuum.”
“Too many Americans seem hypnotized by the slogan that abolishing civil marriage will ‘get the state out of the marriage business.’ [] Have you ever heard anyone who makes this claim explain exactly how it gets the state ‘out’? I haven’t, and I’ve concluded that’s because it does no such thing. Rather, by abolishing marriage, you simply give the state permission to refuse to recognize your marriage, and its attendant rights and responsibilities. This refusal inevitably extends to the rest of family relationships, including parent-child.”
“Thus, the effort to abolish marriage is intimately connected to the ongoing radical redefinition of family. All of this is about - whether consciously and willfully, or not - abolishing family autonomy, abolishing privacy, and, by logical extension, abolishing all personal relationships based on mutual trust. If there is no legally protected autonomy in the family, how can it exist in any other personal relationship? It can’t. By abolishing marriage, we all become strangers to one another in the eyes of the state. Statists have always salivated at the prospect of regulating all of our personal relationships, all of our social interactions. This is not good.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3347481/posts
Because, like RomneyCARE/ObamaCARE, the GOP BEGAN it,
imposed it, threatened anyone (clerks in Mass.) who
did not bend to the GOP agenda.
Surrender what?
Government shouldn’t care about anything the legal/business side of these relationships- which gays are always going to have access to now anyway.
I just don’t think GOVERNMENT is the one who ought to be deciding whether the roomate/financial relationship constitutes a ‘marriage’- and they’re already doing that all over the place.
If I rolled everybody back -straight couples too- to ‘civil partnerships’, I sure don’t see what I’ve surrendered... rather, we’ve stopped government sanctioned gay ‘marriage’ and all the political ramifications that come with that.
There is an awful lot of gay entrepreneurs, it seems- they should be voting Republican, it’s in their general interest to do so
And their wives won’t get invited to the “good” parties.
Gotta give the old queens the ability to buy a boy with Survivor benefits.
It’s true.
It matures us and fosters responsibility and greater understanding
Staying with the same sex is a type of continual childhood/adolescence.
Best to you and your spouse.
(We have two kids, girl 20 and boy 13).
Why Aren’t Any Republicans Talking About the ever looming threat of Islam?
Nothing is being said about Al-Zawahiri’command for lone wolf attacks in the West. Notice what is happening in ISRAEL with the public stabbings and shootings?
Do these numbnuts think that we have no lone wolves hiding among our population? Hey you imbiciles, these lone wolves are MUSLIMS and NOT Presbyterians.
I see no difference between these candidates and what we already have in Congress. The nation is being hoodwinked again.
Think of the money to be made for all the gay divorces.
Not my original thought but my husband's.
Society does not have ill will to Gay. As a Catholic, I say, what would Jesus do? He would not dislike them quite the opposite. The fact is the fact, marriage is by definition between a man and a woman. You cannot change this no matter what society dictates. Apples are apples, they are not oranges. Sorry rambled...
Why aren’t any Republicans talking about getting out of the murder prevention business? After all, murder prevention is a religious issue. A fine secular society has no business using the organs of government to enforce a religious institution like preventing murder.
All the silly “black lives matters” and other moral hangups we are involved in at the moment go away when we stop using government to enforce a moral code of preventing murder...
Marriage is foundational to society building. That’s why religion blesses it, thats why governments bless it. Both are, or have traditionally believed in building society.
The whole purpose of the attacks on marriage that we are seeing is not just to destroy marriage, but the society it founds.
When government gives up on promoting traditional marriage, the leftists have won. That was the point of the whole damn exercise.
Because, as a Republican, I want a society that is blessed and prospers, and because I understand that promoting traditional marriage is essential to that outcome, I know that promoting marriage isn’t just a personal religious belief, it’s a societal and governmental imperative.
I believe there is a strain on our side who truly believe they can turn the beast of big government back to their own purposes. The Catholics want the government to be a big charity, the Baptists want to use the government to stamp out porn, sodomy, and dancing etc etc. This is why the beast never gets cut down when we have the power. The rational position is sudden death or rollback for these programs and agencies, yet nothing ever gets killed off except things we need, like the A-10.
However, there was no such thing as “Lincensed Marriage” until the late 1800’s.
There shouldn’t be now, as it no longer has a “traditional” value.
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.