Hasselbeck is being so naive. To equate “love” with sexual lust? To adopt Marxist language that is an oxymoron: gay marriage? What is that? That concept is bizarre and destructive to civil societies which want to create a future for their children.
There is a natural reason to unite one man and one woman and any other definition of marriage is obscene and will make the word meaningless. Christianity’s definition of marriage has made the most profound and successful societies on earth. Undermining Christian philosophy (Marxism) only creates moral morass because you destroy human dignity and human worth—such as the importance of sex in relationships for the sake of children and a future.
Does she not love her children? Does she understand that true love has nothing to do with sexual urges and sexual lust? Does she think that love means you have to have sex with someone to truly love them? What an idiot.
She is reducing the most profound human feeling into selfish, nihilistic, lust-filled sexual acts which all homosexual practice does. It reduces sex to a commodity...makes sex meaningless.
Think of what kind of Marxist, atheistic world you are trying to create for your children. Read the “Brave New World” and that is what you will get with this ugly, repulsive camel’s nose. We are talking about creating a society with absolutely NO human dignity and no freedom of religion.
Exempting Christian sexual morality from humanity puts us right back into the orgies of “pagan” Rome where homosexuality was practiced and condoned for centuries and where children were sacrificed to the gods. Come on, Hasselbeck, we can not reduce ourselves to a society who is only interested in pleasuring oneself. It will always destroy the society in the end.
Her brand of Christianity has in intellectually undeveloped. Therefore she can give no reasoned defense of its moral teachings.