Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MadIvan
Hmm... I have a few thoughts on the gay marriage deal that I have been wanting to share with my fellow FREEPERS.

What's really at the root of this gay marriage deal? A truly-conservative solution.

My thought about why this is such an issue...simple: the nanny state, once again, is the root cause.

I think that most of us think/feel:

Even though I think being gay is immoral and don't agree with it, I really don't care what someone does in their bedroom. I don't approve of it, but it isn't my business. However, I don't think that gay people should be getting married, in the traditional sense. That's for a man and a woman.
Most gays will call this homophobic. A straight person's statement along that line (or similar) isn't homophobic and it's only slightly ignorant. In fact, the above sentiment is the majority of people's "gut reaction", right, wrong, or indifferent. Most people think that gays are pushing their agenda and, to some degree, they're right.

Anyone can draw up a "contract" that binds two individuals together financially, economically, shared property, etc. Anyone can organize and hold an "elegant" ceremony and a reception afterwards. In fact, many gay people had marriage ceremonies --complete with wedding rings, vows, etc-- well before this issue became so heated. Many gay people have been living together for years (decades in some cases) with no need to get married. When a gay person dies, they can bequeath my belongings to anyone they want.

So, why do gays want to get "married"? Why are gays pushing the gay marriage agenda? Why do they need the marriage certificate, signed by their county, authorized by their state?

Answer: survivor (Social Security and other governmentally-provided) benefits.

If a gay person dies, their partner can't collect social security or any other type of governmental death benefit. WhY? You see, these benefits are not tranferrable.

Interestingly and quite ironically, the solution to this "problem" lies in the extremely conservative notion of privatizing social security. A topic that most gays would line up square against. Not because it couldn't solve the very reason why they "need" to be "married" (it would). Not because, as individuals, gay people couldn't look at the numbers and conclude that they would be much better off with having a private retirement account (they would). Mostly because of the factions that gay people associated themselves with: anti-Bush/anti-conservative special interest groups.

So, in large part, it is a gay person's own political pride that is preventing them from spearheading a program that would completely solve their issues about "survivor benefits".

44 posted on 07/24/2004 5:24:41 PM PDT by mattdono ([mattdono to John Kerry]: I voted for you...right before I voted against you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: mattdono

The guy was caught advertising for unsafe sex (i.e., let's spread this stuff around) on the internet. His judgment's not all that great. In fact, it's downright poor.


48 posted on 07/24/2004 5:29:56 PM PDT by Steve_Stifler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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