Why Aren't Any Republicans Talking About Getting Government Out of the Marriage Business?

Reaganite Republican ^ | 04 October 2015 | Reaganite Republican

[Reaganite Republican]

Look, you can be as close with any consenting adult as you like. I sure don't care what they're doing behind closed doors, either- why let things you cannot possibly control bother you?

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... 

Government needs to step-away from the moral side of this topic -which is really none of it's concern- and issue ANY and all couples 'civil partnership' arrangements, as is done in -of all places- France. 

People can pick whatever church they like to get 'married', and apparently quite a number don't mind performing marriage ceremonies for gay couples. 

The left should have no problem with that, except they're out to control gays -and their sympathizers- as a dependable voter block and need the federal government involved- obviously.

But what Republicans need is to eliminate this debate as an ongoing election issue -it's a permanent, guaranteed political LOSER as it stands- and prevent the left from bludgeoning us over the head with disingenuous 'gotcha' questions all the time. Actually 'gay marriage' needs to be removed from our lexicon -and the political sphere- entirely.

Homosexuals can go get married wherever they like -Vegas chapel, whatever- but it is against the US Constitution to force -say- the Catholic Church to perform gay ceremonies. It's also unconstitutional to compel Christians to bake Troy and Brandon their rainbow cake. 

Of course, the situation with clerk Kim Davis in Kentucky could have been avoided entirely- instead of the left being able to target this poor woman for humiliation and manufactured outrage.

Surely federal and state governments have better things to do than get involved in ANYthing beyond legal, binding 'civil partnerships' for any and all couples-- and that means two old widows who just want to lease a car together, buy property, get hospital visits, guarantee inheritance, enjoy tax benefits, or otherwise pool their resources. What's the problem with that?

As a lifelong Catholic, I personally dislike gay 'marriage', and consider it a farce- but other people's business isn't mine. And the issue will never, ever do the Republican Party one bit of good politically. My favorite Ted Cruz says 'leave it to the states', but as long as we continue to debate this Republicans will be painted as 'intolerant' by the left.

Perhaps some gay people who desire a strong economy -and don't particularly yearn to be tossed off a rooftop by ISIS- would actually evolve more responsible voters, concerned for the general welfare of the nation instead of being the one-issue voters they so often are. 

You'd have to imagine with this 'marriage' issue off-the-table a lot of homosexuals might come to their senses and realize what havoc they've helped foist upon this once-great land by voting for sweet-talking liberal charlatans who pumped-up their self-esteem with shallow symbolism...

[bgill]

What? And give up that license fee?!? Never!

[Responsibility2nd]

You’re a liberal, aren’t you?

Only a liberaltarian would think the about getting Government “Out of the Marriage Business”.

[Gandalf the Mauve]

Why Aren't Any Republicans Talking About Getting Government Out of the Marriage Business?

Because the GOP Establishment politicians talk about rolling back Big Government, but they don't intend to actually do anything about it -- it's just BS to fool the rubes.