Skip to comments.Marriage Amendment: Vote yes
Posted on 10/21/2012 3:12:08 PM PDT by rhema
"Children are the world's most valuable resource and its best hope for the future." -- JOHN F. KENNEDY
There are countless wonderful programs and organizations dedicated to making sure that kids are safe, involved in school and off drugs, out of poverty, eating healthier, not engaging in self-destructive behavior, and achieving their dreams.
I remember practicing "stop, drop and roll" in first grade, completing "Dare to Keep Kids Off Drugs" in fifth grade, and having teachers and counselors guide me through the right classes and activities to set me on a successful path to college. As a former teacher, I adapted curriculum to better meet individual student needs.
Politicians at both state and federal levels often focus their debates on whether policies will help or hurt children. Even courts are guided by the legal principle that family conflicts should be adjudicated to provide for "the best interests of the child."
It seems everyone realizes that what's best for kids should guide our governmental policies and social institutions. This is because children really are our most precious resource, and government and society have a compelling interest in seeing them thrive.
It is surprising, then, that the conversation about what the definition of marriage in Minnesota should be has left many who speak up about the best interests of kids labeled as "bigots," "haters," "discriminators" and worse.
Marriage is the most prochild institution we have -- and the only institution that connects children with their parents. Through marriage, men and women come together complementarily to form one union, not only for the benefit of the couple, but also for the children who benefit from being loved and raised by their mother and father.
Marriage says to society as a whole: For every child born, there is a recognized mother and father,
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
I know that many people think of Washington as a "progressive" state, and because of the Seattle area it is understandable. But, the East side of the state is much more conservative; so, we will see what happens.
Got my out of country ballot from WA. Saw the referendum. If it was called “civil union” I’d have no problem with that. It’s the term “marriage” that grates on me. Since King Co.is the most populated county, that along with Pierce, Snohomish and Kitsap, they pretty much rule the whole state. Would be nice if there were electoral colleges at the state level.
If you are in Maryland, vote no.
Maryland’s marriage question is posed as a pro-gay marriage amendment, with a proviso for religious conscience. But once the gay marriage becomes official, watch for the religious persecutions and school indoctrinations to flourish in so many places it will be impossible to contain them.
See Massachusetts for an example, where since the passage of gay marriage, young kids now have GBLT proms “chaperoned” by adult GBLT’s — just there to keep the kids out of trouble. Oh, right.
The pro same sex marriage agenda necessitates the sexualization of children. Their recommended curriculum for grade school and younger children are lessons to normalize same sex relationships. Children are not at that age (or any other I contend) prepared for such agendas without causing mass confusion and sexualizing them at an early age.
Granted I went to grade school in the sixties before sex - ed was a part of school. But I wish kids today had my experience - an experience when all matters of a sexual nature were not a part of my world and my friends world till we were at least 12 or 13 and even then it was superficial. We were allowed to be kids - not pawns of a narcissistic society. In the eighties I thought all the fuss about sex ed in school was overblown - now I see it for the Trojan (no pun intended) horse that it was and is.
I am concerned about this not passing in MN. If one decides NOT to vote for the amendment, it is counted as a “NO” vote. I know some people don’t want to vote on this amendment at all, but if they leave it blank, they are voting “no”. UGH.
The Homosexual Lobby has sunk a LOT of $$ here to defeat this amendment. They see Minnesota as their foothold in this nationwide battle.
We have a “Vote Yes” sign in our yard and just know that it won’t stay there for long—leftists can’t stand differing opinions. This is why we have a spare in our garage. ;^)
Ever read Wendy Shalit? Her _Return to Modesty_ has some interesting observations about the effect of sex ed in school. Her perspective was and is possible only because her mother opted her OUT of it in school.
The only reason for government social contracts is for Justice (protect private property) and is to facilitate human beings into doing their most fundamental “Duty”-—so mankind will flourish and can pursue happiness.
Taking all responsibility for one’s biological offspring IS the most fundamental duty of mankind. Only a marriage between a man and woman can provide a system where ALL mankind can do their primary duty—which doesn’t separate the emotional and material world.
When you destroy that system-—you make human beings into objects for sell or whatever. Any other system is evil which is artificial and unnatural. It deprives human beings of their biological and genetic histories—that which helps make life meaningful—both past and the future. It deprives children of their natural rights to their biological parents—importance of genetic connection for mental health is established.
Denial of their biological rights makes children no different than property to be sold or traded. It is inhumane.
God’s Laws command us to do our Duty-—the most fundamental one is to take care of our progeny. The State can not interfere with Natural law—which is the foundation of our Legal System.
Social networks and government is necessary—not if we were angels, as the Founders noted. But we aren’t, and our government has to have laws which obey “the laws of nature and nature’s God”-—which means homosexual “marriage” is inconceivable in such a government from both ‘Rights from God’ and ‘Natural Law’ standpoints.
The only disgusting thing is the Marxist -in-Chief and justices who claim there is no God (or boo and mock God). They are conferring Satanic Rights on our citizens and teaching children “Rights come from Satan” (sodomy and abortion), instead of the FACT that US Rights come from God.
God is the Source of our Constitutional Rights, not barney frank who is truly disgusting.
The battle against gay marriage is another facet of a larger battle:
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”
WELCOME TO FREE REPUBLIC’S MINNESOTA PING LIST!
151 MEMBERS AND GROWING...!
FREEPMAIL ME IF YOU WANT ON OR OFF THIS LIST!
The no side is out advertising the yes side about 50 to 1 (in my unscientific observation.
The no ads are all so awful it’s hard to pick my favorite but there’s one with an angry white guy saying through clenched teeth that GOVERNMENT doesn’t tell you who to love so GOVERNMENT shouldn’t tell you who you can marry.
There are about 10 classic fallacies in that one.
Both sides want government to interfere in religion. One to use one religions edicts to restrict it, the other to over right our religions laws on one man one
Why can’t we leave it to the Church?
One man, one woman, one God. Drives the leftists nuts.