Posted on 07/01/2013 5:26:10 AM PDT by shortstop
Now that marriage means nothing, we should think of new ways to define it.
The Supreme Court last week threw out marriage as understood by most peoples since sometime before Christ was born. In what the president called “a victory for democracy,” a vote of the people and an act of their representatives were nullified by judicial arrogance.
The fundamental unit of society has been changed, not by the wishes or practice of the people, or of their elected representatives, but by the cobbled-together opinion of five unaccountable political appointees in Washington, D.C.
Government for the people, by the people, of the people is not how we play the game today.
And so, marriage has been retired.
The government has claimed it and changed it and, there being no recourse short of armed rebellion, the people will simply abandon it. Legal marriage is no longer in any substantive way what millennia of humankind has understood it to be.
By redefining what it means, the government has made sure that it means nothing.
I’m not saying that men and women won’t pledge their lives to one another, but they will no longer put particular stock in the sanction of the state. Slaves denied access to marriage formulated their own ritual and covenant – they jumped the stick. The American people, now denied marriage as their faith has taught it since the Isrealites left Egypt, will likewise formulate their own ritual and covenant.
Churches will hold ceremonies, individuals will make promises, but the government sanction of marriage is henceforth a cheap and adulterated imitation.
The slate has been wiped clean.
Which means it is free to be written upon.
Now that government-sanctioned marriage is a sacrilege offering nothing more than the filthy lucre of government and employee benefits, new ways to use it will be found.
If the government makes marriage a joke, then resourceful people will make what they can out of the scrap.
For example, if marriage can now be contracted between two men, and those two men can have access to one another’s employment and government benefits, nothing says those two men have to be gay.
Nothing says that marriage has to be sexual. Nothing says it has to include love, of any kind.
If you have benefits and we are friends – or I pay you enough – nothing stops us from marrying so that I may receive your benefits. If I am about to die, and you are my friend, why don’t we marry so that you can get my Social Security survivor benefits?
What is to stop two young roommates, who happen to be the same gender, from entering into a marriage of convenience for financial benefit?
Nothing.
If marriage doesn’t have to be marriage, then same-sex marriage doesn’t have to be gay marriage.
It is merely a contract, an odd status under law in which one person opens the door of benefit to another. Is this a fraud?
Absolutely not.
The Supreme Court has said that all people have a right to marry. Why they marry is their business. There is a traditional purpose to marriage, certainly. But if the court says the traditional definition of marriage is gone, then no one can be surprised by the end of the traditional purpose of marriage.
Nor can anyone protest new uses for marriage.
In the new era, marriage is your plus one. It simply means that, as you claim benefits from your employer or the government, you can check off the “spouse” box, your plus one.
It doesn’t matter who your plus one is.
It doesn’t matter the gender, it doesn’t matter the motivation, it only matters that you’ve got your rights.
And I suggest you use your rights to stick it to them. If marriage means nothing, treat it like nothing, treat them like nothing. Don’t let a dollar go uncollected.
We are sadly are a very badly divided country.
bttt
Rights from the government and not from God always will cause problems. Look at what the Civil Right laws did for blacks since the 1960’s. It has killed their families. This will do the same for all families.
We need to shore up federal and state laws protecting religious freedom. I would not rely on the 1st Amendment free exercise guaranty, as we all know any leftist judge will water it down and manipulate it to mean whatever he wants it to mean (i.e., nothing).
Start preparing now for the next focus of the communists — destroying those churches which don’t sign onto the gay agenda. And at the same time try and keep real marriage alive in the 37 states that don’t yet have fake marriage.
Weird. I’m still married to my Wife and that still means something to me.
I never wanted the government involved in that equation to begin with.
If it destroys the family, or reduces the Christian influence in society,
he’ll be championing it.
Since drawing the line at one man, one woman, was deemed discriminatory and bigoted,
drawing the line at two people is no less so.
You cannot change the definition of something that God defines.
An organization however formed by man, which adheres to certain principles and beliefs CAN be redefined.... such as the BSA.
Let us make that distinction.
It’s OK to steal if you only do it to a few people. And if you are stealing, it is most advantageous to steal from those who have the stuff to make it worthwhile. Duh!
Have you ever noticed that much, or most of what government does is things which would be considered criminal if you did it yourself, or with a group of cooperating friends (call it a “gang”)? Much of what was considered vice is either taken over by the government (the biggest, toughest gang in the neighborhood), or legalized to please their supporters (if there is no real cash profit involved). Almost all the old rackets are now in government hands: gambling, liquor, counterfeiting, and (coming soon) prostitution. The latter has long been controlled by the police in México. It is licensed in Nevada and many European countries: government as the pimp.
We are in effect being ruled by a large, very complicated, criminal gang.
Now anyone who studies sociology of gangs, knows that there must be some unifying bonds among the members of a gang, so that they know on whom to prey, and whom to trust. In many gangs ethnicity is a unifying factor. This is probably our future, as the country breaks into ethnic and linguistic factions. That is the way it works in Russia.
The rule of law is disintegrating, and only a thin veil of democracy remains: but it is meaningless, without constitutional restraints, which are being swept aside in succession almost daily.
That’s true. But it wouldn’t be the first time God’s faithful were outnumbered.
It’s time to re-read the Bible’s instructions to the “diaspora” (the “dispersed”) and stop trying to fit into society. Others around us will be blessed by our faithfulness to God. (”Ye are the salt of the earth”, “Let your light so shine among men”, etc.)
And what about animal rights?
Excellent post, you took the words right out of my mouth. The Godless didn’t steal marriage — how can they steal the things of God? No, they erected a golden calf and are worshiping it. True marriage is still what it always has been — a blessing from God, not from the State. Anything else is an imitation.
We could very well see increase missionary activity coming from the Christian communites in what is now the “global south natiions” to get the Gospel of Jesus out to America and the west rather.
I see breakup of the USA down the road.l
I await the court case over whether a wealthy person may marry their son/daughter (the man and woman combinations really don't matter). Of course they'd be marrying so that the offspring could inherit their parent's estate tax-free, but that wouldn't matter. I'm eager to hear the twisted logic from the homosexuals as to why that shouldn't be allowed.
"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable— what then?"
-George Orwell, 1984
This country will break up into seperate nations.
See tag line.
Hey! Sofas need lovin too! Don’t be a hater!
(heavy doses of /sarc)
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.