Posted on 03/14/2013 7:41:29 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Because they have a significant hold over our media.
One cannot really run a society on pure libertarian principles. It just won’t work.
Eventually, the “shoulds” and “oughts” of human life will get in the way.
The moment you have LAWS, you are implicitly admitting that certain moral principles must be adhered to by society whether individuals like it or not.
And these LAWS will depend on what Moral Values ( i.e. First Principles ) society adheres to. It can be informed by Christianity, Islam, Buddhism or Atheism, but you cannot escape or avoid adhering to something.
Rand is right, as far as I’m concerned-the fed has no business in what is a religious ritual/sacrament at all, period-it has become a slippery slope.
I was taught that marriage is a sacrament-not a celebration of signing a contract at a courthouse. I don’t see the word “marriage” in the constitution listed as an inalienable right, either-leave it to the religious institutions to define what marriage is or is not. I believe it is the only way to stop the government meddling in church business.
This where Rand Paul is destructine and not a conservative. Obviously he doesn’t believe in the natural law as our founders did. Why o why has the natural law changed in some way? I’m not sure you can call yourself a Christian and support the destruction of society and the family.
but the media doesn’t have a significant hold on anyone, does it?
The other thing about the “get government out of the marriage business” position is that it is absolutely cowardly and shows a real lack of courage to defend what is right and good about America.
It's not for nothing that members of the homosexual lobby and the abortion lobby are always found at each other's fund-raisers. The abortionists, as O'Keefe showed, serve the needs of pimps who run under-age girls, for which they are reimbursed with taxpayer dollars for "indigent women" under Title X. The homosexual males want to legalize and expand their trade in young boys. Lesbians are along for the ride, undermining marriage for the sake of sticking it to less-damaged women who were able to bond with men.
The law is not just a teacher. It's an enabler. It needs to be made to enable good, rather than utter evil.
I really don’t know what the answer is to this mess, but wouldn’t individual states already honor contracts between individuals on pretty much this sort of thing?
so you’re all for government intervention as long as you agree with what they are intervening. Got it.
I’ve had this argument for as long as I can remember. If the tax system were flat then the government wouldn’t need to care who is married. It should rightfully be a decision of the Church or other institutions to decide what marriage is and who can be married. I’m sure the true believers don’t accept gay “marriage” as a part of a perfect plan of the almighty. Support for gay “marriage” in the context of religious institutions would necessarily plummet.
marriage is not religious under the law.
using religion to argue marriage surrenders the debate to the left in total. for law, logic trumps mere faith.
Logic is the rule here. Marriage is about family and what is a legal family for the furtherance of society. Child production, child raising, pathernity and maternity, inheritance, and property rights.
marriage is a commonon law institution. It is not a legislative fiction. Any legislative change can only be narrowly construed. For example adoption does not exist at common law, thus all adoption law is a legislative act and narrowly construed.
Society rewards the institution not the individual recreational sex.
There is no love test in the constitution either.
There is no international tourism law.
There is no immigration law in the constitution.
logic must rule, faith is a tool of the enemy (ala the left saying christians must always surrender to the lions)
What has radically changed in the last 230+ years with regards to the natural law that the founders fully belived in that warrants this radical chabge in the way that government respects and acknowledges traditions and beliefs of almost every human civilization? Nothing.
It goes beyond that. They see it as just and freeing if children down to the preschool level are taught that they can be whatever sex—or something otherwise or in between, that they’d like to be. I’ve come across that argument already.
RE: as far as I’m concerned-the fed has no business in what is a religious ritual/sacrament at all, period-it has become a slippery slope.
Let’s put our thinking caps on for a while.
Let’s say that the term “marriage” is not longer an institution the government ( Fed or State or local ) recognizes.
How does the government administer laws like immigration, spousal contracts, divorce, social security, etc. if we do away with the recognition of marriage?
Does the government regulate private contracts thru the public courts or not? Is not the contract between husband and wife the most important contract that can be put into force?
I agree with you - what do we do about Social Security spousal benefits? I see that as the only real problem
I TOLD YOU ALL
HE IS NOT A CONSERVATIVE!
HIS POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY IS BASED ON IMMORALITY, NOT FREEDOM
LICENSE, NOT LIBERTY!
Last time I check Sodomy is not a crime.. I take it you want the Government to arrest people who does Sodomy???
The only one of those that's a problem is Social Security. Divorce (division of property) is already common among Hollywood's unmarried. I would like to know how SS would be handled if the Fed got out of the marriage business (which I think they should).
If the institution of marriage and raising a family isn’t directly implied in the phrase “life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” I don’t know what is.
Goddamn. Rand, what a moron.
Why are we capitulating on one of our most important issues?
Cross him off the list for 2016. He coulda been a contender.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.