Freepmail wagglebee or DirtyHarryY2K to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.
Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.
Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.
Checkout: http://SilencingChristians.com
It’s war, and the left believes in winning by any means necessary.
The first idea sounds good to me - that’s what I’ve always suggested should be done. Marriage is a religious institution and there’s no reason for the state to get involved.
THIS IS NOT A MATTER OF “EQUALITY”.
There could be many legal routes to “equality” under the law, and the voters and legislature of California provided it, under the states current Domestic Partnership statute.
What the opponents of Prop-8 seek is not for registered same-sex relationships to be treated “equal” but to be declared the “same as” a marriage relationship.
The terms “equal” and same do not mean the same thing; to be equal it is not necessary to be artificially declared “same as” something which one is obviously not “same as”.
Social conservatives have been right all along. The legal radicals use of the gay agenda is not about gays or their agenda - the leftists don’t really give a dam about them - it has, all along, been an assault on marriage.
The foundation of marriage IS derived from the biology and socially required responsibilities derived having children.
If human reproduction had been arranged differently and if the needs and maturation-rate of human children were different, it is possible that marriage would not have developed, as it has, and conversely, it is primarily due to those elements that it exists now.
The beginning and end of those elements and the responsibilities that flow therefrom are not contained, not fully defined, not fully required by the simple notion of the romantically committed couple.
Are there marriages without children? Yes. Are children possible to couples in ways other than natural child birth? Yes.
But those are exceptions, permitted exceptions and not foundational to the basic institution of marriage, of why it was instituted and why it will always be needed and why it needs to be protected.
We need a Federal Amendment to Protect Marriage.
well now this would require legislative approval would it not? Since such a level of change was deemed a “substantive constitutional issue” by the legislature.