The Death of Marriage I

MensNewsDaily.com ^ | February 5, 2004 | Roger F. Gay

[RogerFGay]

ping

[breakem]

"death of marriage"

defense of marriage"

"protection of marriage"

"save marriage"

Propaganda never sleeps.

[RogerFGay]

ping

[Modernman]

This should be a fun thread.

[RogerFGay]

We never seem to run out of people who comment on articles without reading them either.

[RogerFGay]

Hope it stimulates serious discussion.

[Modernman]

Hope it stimulates serious discussion

That would be nice. We've had a lot of flame wars on this subject lately.

[Romulus]

It certainly doesn't. Assaults on marriage are assaults on authentic anthropology.

[RogerFGay]

I hope people at least read the article first, before responding to the subject generally.

[RicocheT]

The homosexual agenda seems to be to get all the rights heterosexual couples now have. They should be careful for what they wish for.

Much of the excitement of homosexual life was being different, operating on the cutting edge, being risky, laughing at the disapproval of the majority, having many encounters with new sex partners. Are they going to give that up in their drive to be just like the rest of us?

Are homosexuals ready for the realities of most marriages that go into middle age and beyond? Will they enjoy the flabby bodies, the snoring, the burps after spicy foods, the separate bedrooms, semi annual sex, having kids who despise you but want their hands in your pocketbook, the mailings from AARP?

A good dose of the lifestyle of the majority may just convince them to go back into the closet.

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda Alert Ping - Just got up, haven't read this article yet... Gotta get more organized. Breakem doesn't like it so it must have some worth.

Let me know if you want to be added to or subtracted from this highly worthy ping list.

[wiseone]

excellent report by Dr. Baskerville


it's pathetic that few have the courage to stand up for men,& families,instead bending over for sodomites and lesbo deviants posing as morally superior!!

Lesbo ellen degeneres now has a morning tv show, as seen by rock & pop icons street whore behavior!

[Modernman]

In a real sense, there are three partners to every civil marriage: two willing spouses and an approving State. ... Civil marriage is created and regulated through exercise of the police power.

Interesting point. I'm starting to lean towards the view that government should simply get out of the marriage business. Allow consenting adults to enter into any contract they desire (excluding contracts that would be illegal on other grounds: slavery contracts, etc.), in any combination of consenting adults they desire (1 man plus 1 woman, 2 homosexuals, 3 men and 1 woman, 4 heterosexual roommates). The government should take no view as to what defines a "marriage" or "civil-union" or whatever. If a religion wants to recognize such a contract as a marriage, great.

[little jeremiah]

Just for you - a few statements by noted homosexual spokespeople and so on, admitting that their REAL reasons for pushing for "gay" marriage are to change the morality of society in general, and the meaning of marriage and family in particular:


An excerpt from: In Their Own Words: The Homosexual Agenda:
"Homosexual activist Michelangelo Signorile, who writes periodically for The New York Times, summarizes the agenda in OUT magazine:

...to fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society's moral codes, but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution... The most subversive action lesbian and gay men can undertake --and one that would perhaps benefit all of society--is to transform the notion of family entirely." "Its the final tool with which to dismantle all sodomy statues, get education about homosexuality and AIDS into the public schools and in short to usher in a sea change in how society views and treats us."


"A middle ground might be to fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society's moral codes but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution." Michenlangelo Signorile in OUT magazine (Dec/Jan 1994.)

Chris Crain, the editor of the Washington Blade has stated that all homosexual activists should fight for the legalization of same-sex marriage as a way of gaining passage of federal anti-discrimination laws that will provide homosexuals with federal protection for their chosen lifestyle.
Crain writes: "...any leader of any gay rights organization who is not prepared to throw the bulk of their efforts right now into the fight for marriage is squandering resources and doesn't deserve the position." (Washington Blade, August, 2003).

Andrew Sullivan, a homosexual activist writing in his book, Virtually Normal, says that once same-sex marriage is legalized, heterosexuals will have to develop a greater "understanding of the need for extramarital outlets between two men than between a man and a woman." He notes: "The truth is, homosexuals are not entirely normal; and to flatten their varied and complicated lives into a single, moralistic model is to miss what is essential and exhilarating about their otherness." (Sullivan, Virtually Normal, pp. 202-203)

Paula Ettelbrick, a law professor and homosexual activist has said: "Being queer is more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so. . Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family; and in the process, transforming the very fabric of society. . We must keep our eyes on the goals of providing true alternatives to marriage and of radically reordering society's view of reality." (partially quoted in "Beyond Gay Marriage," Stanley Kurtz, The Weekly Standard, August 4, 2003)

Evan Wolfson has stated: "Isn't having the law pretend that there is only one family model that works (let alone exists) a lie? . marriage is not just about procreation-indeed is not necessarily about procreation at all. "(quoted in "What Marriage Is For," by Maggie Gallagher, The Weekly Standard, August 11, 2003)

Mitchel Raphael, editor of the Canadian homosexual magazine Fab, says: "Ambiguity is a good word for the feeling among gays about marriage. I'd be for marriage if I thought gay people would challenge and change the institution and not buy into the traditional meaning of 'till death do us part' and monogamy forever. We should be Oscar Wildes and not like everyone else watching the play." (quoted in "Now Free To Marry, Canada's Gays Say, 'Do I?'" by Clifford Krauss, The New York Times, August 31, 2003)

1972 Gay Rights Platform Demands: "Repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit."

[RogerFGay]

As mentioned in the article, heterosexual couples have been denied constitutional rights entirely in matters related to marriage and family. The decision was odd for that reason alone; applying the constitution in favor of same-sex marriage when it's been completely shut out of (heterosexual) family law for more than a decade.

[Mamzelle]

Next step: decriminalize bigamy.

[AreaMan]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1071650/posts

[RogerFGay]

Interesting point. I'm starting to lean towards the view that government should simply get out of the marriage business. Allow consenting adults to enter into any contract they desire

That's kind of the way it was before the federal reforms, given to us by Congress. The details of the marriage "contract" had been worked out through many generations of limited government involvement in private family issues; ie. when one spouse sued another in civil court. Basic civil rights were applied to each, circumstances were taken into consideration, rights and obligations divied up --- generally what was worked out was at least in theory minimum government intrusion (all that other stuff had something to do with reality -- the courts simply doing the job of settling disputes.)

[Modernman]

Much of the excitement of homosexual life was being different, operating on the cutting edge, being risky, laughing at the disapproval of the majority, having many encounters with new sex partners. Are they going to give that up in their drive to be just like the rest of us?

I think homosexual marriage, if legalized, will be pretty rare, at least for gay men. I can see a lot of lesbians getting married and staying married for a long time since lesbian relationships tend to be pretty stable. For the average gay man, however, I don't see marriage and monogamy being particularly attractive.

What if we legalize gay marriage and nobody gets married. Could we be making a mountain out of a mole hill?