Anything that involves decency, morals and God are his target.
My brother and I have joked about this for years. If we ever find ourselves both single, we say that we’re going to marry to share our benefits.
we are already there, it is the the three parent family
>>Now that gay marriage is acceptable, I can’t wait to see what Obama’s next crusade to destroy America and her traditions will be.
This isn’t his only oar in the water. He will continue with his crusade to remove our work ethic and sense of individualism. He will continue with his crusade to replace the true God with his Marxist/Muslim vision of Natural Man as god. He will continue his crusade to bankrupt the country and to lower the living standard of the people to what he deems to be “enough”.
Marriage means exactly what it always meant. The State didn’t define it before now, and they don’t define it now.
Let me give you an analogy. The right to bear arms was correctly defined by our Founders to be a natural right of man. The 2A doesn’t give us that right; it only acknowledges it. If the left successfully nullifies the 2A as a function of law, it doesn’t change the fact that we have a natural right to bear arms; a right that transcends the law.
The same is true of Marriage. Marriage is not ordained by the State. To the extent that the State has codified legal provisions to provide the civil benefits implied by Marriage and calls that Marriage, all is well and good. To the extent the State perverts those provisions, it only affects the civil nature that the State automatically assigns to a Civil (and therefore under the State’s control) Ceremony.
For most of us, Marriage is a Religious Ceremony first, and a Civil Ceremony second. The State’s “ordination” of Marriage only applies to the legal status associated with Marriage that it controls.
I mislike the title of this thread. The definition of Marriage hasn’t changed. The State doesn’t have that power. We do well to remember that.
So, when does polygamy become legal? After they scream & shout loud & long enough about being 2nd class citizens?
Who cares what the SCOTUS says on homosexual marriage? I don’t. It won’t change my view one iota. And if that’s a crime, too F’n bad. The Yankee government can try to shove it down my throat, but my mind won’t accept it.
And for the NSA trolls, FU.
When I heard that from obama I retched. How a decision handed down from on high by five solons who are above being answerable to any electorate, and whose decision not only overturned a straightforward electoral decision but told that electorate that they have no standing to defend the voted-on law, is a vitory for democracy is beyond me.
The number of individuals and methods of marital association is now limited only by mathematical permutation.
Imagine the possibilities: Facebook and Linkedin marriages among thousands of people who have never met! Of course, I assume that discarded sofas would still be ruled out.
....Government should get its fat nose out of it.
HA! Riiiiiight. Good luck with that.
If marriage brings "benefits," why are so many heterosexuals shunning it?
The number and percentage of unwed co-habitating couples is at an all time high.
Marriage ceased to mean anything when it became commonplace for people to live together, have sex, and procreate without its blessing.
The decision actually may go beyond Marriage. It could well redefine the family unit. I for one am exploring adopting my dogs, getting them Social Security numbers, voting registration and applying not only for tax credits, but for numerous social grants.
If Americans will just get behind this kind of thinking, they just might be forced to look at the door they opened.
In the Old Testament Isaiah prophesied of a time when standards and behavioral attitudes would be reversed, and Jesus said in the end-times many people would be deceived:-
Isa 5:20 “ Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”
Scene: Marriage License counter, City Clerk’s office.
“Next.”
“Good morning. We want to apply for a marriage license.”
“Names?”
“Tim and Jim Jones.”
“Jones?? Are you related?? I see a resemblance.”
“Yes, we’re brothers.”
“Brothers?? You can’t get married.”
“Why not?? Aren’t you giving marriage licenses to same gender couples?”
“Yes, thousands. But we haven’t had any siblings. That’s incest!”
“Incest?” We are not gay.”
“Not gay?? Then why do you want to get married?”
“For the financial benefits, of course. And we do love each other.
Besides, we don’t have any other prospects.”
“But we’re issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples who’ve
been denied equal protection under the law. If you are not gay, you
can get married to a woman.”
“Wait a minute. A gay man has the same right to marry a woman as I
have. But just because I’m straight doesn’t mean I want to marry a
woman. I want to marry Jim.”
“And I want to marry Tim, Are you going to discriminate against us
just because we are not gay?”
“All right, all right. I’ll give you your license. Next.”
“Hi. We are here to get married.”
“Names?”
“John Smith, Jane James, Robert Green, and June Johnson.”
“Who wants to marry whom?”
“We all want to marry each other.”
“But there are four of you!”
“That’s right. You see, we’re all bisexual. I love Jane and Robert,
Jane loves me and June, June loves Robert and Jane, and Robert loves
June and me. All of us getting married together is the only way that
we can express our sexual preferences in a marital relationship.”
“But we’ve only been granting licenses to gay and lesbian couples.”
“So you’re discriminating against bisexuals!”
“No, it’s just that, well, the traditional idea of marriage is that
it’s just for couples.”
“Since when are you standing on tradition?”
“Well, I mean, you have to draw the line somewhere.”
“Who says?? There’s no logical reason to limit marriage to couples.
The more the better. Besides, we demand our rights! The mayor says the
constitution guarantees equal protection under the law. Give us a
marriage license!”
“All right, all right. Next.”
“Hello, I’d like a marriage license.”
“In what names?”
“David Deets.”
“And the other man?”
“That’s all. I want to marry myself.”
“Marry yourself?? What do you mean?”
“Well, my psychiatrist says I have a dual personality, so I want to
marry the other me. Maybe I can file a joint income-tax return.”
“That does it!? I quit!!? You people are making a mockery of marriage!!”
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.