Posted on 06/28/2003 1:07:17 AM PDT by kattracks
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:15:00 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
June 28, 2003 -- Seven same-sex couples began fighting yesterday for the right to get married in New Jersey
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
"The government should not interfere with anyone who wants to marry."
Idiots! The government does not interfere with anyone who "qualifies" to marry. So, phase 2, challenge the qualifications.
Sounds like the same argument being used by NAMBLA, Pedophiles, Polygamous, and Animal lovers.
They will just change the definitions again. Not long ago homosexual activity was medically considered a mental defect. Now it's being pushed as the norm.
Exactly what rights are they talking about? Do married people get rights denied unmarried homo duos?
Too late! Government schools already have the children. Brainwashing begins in Kindergarten with the sex ed programs that normalize homosexuality. It continues in Middle and High School with "Day of Silence" where students who support GLBT hold up cards asking teachers to "understand" their silence on behalf of those who have no voice. And, oh yeah, most schools have GLBT clubs. Not to be outdone, PETA makes their voice heard in the government schools as well, handing out literature on vegetarianism.
(Sigh) like a snowball rolling down a hill, the GLBT lobbies have taken this country by siege while we sit back and discuss its ramifications in forums such as this.
The following commentary by Dwight Longenecker is an astute commentary on the next wave of lawsuits. Enjoy!
WHY NOT BI-SEXUAL POLYGAMY?
Where we're headed <
I was fascinated by the detail of one comment from a Canadian that folks North of the Border have put a new item on the liberal agenda: they want to recognise polygamy between people of various sexual inclinations.
Here's how the argument will go: Let's imagine things just ten or twenty years down the line.
By now homosexual 'marriage' is accepted as a mainstream alternative. But what about those people who live in a threesome? Why shouldn't they get 'married'? The permutations are endless: a homosexual man with another man and his wife, a lesbian with her girlfriend and her girlfriend's husband, a man who simply wants two or three or however many wives, a woman who wants to have two or three or more husbands. A man who's had a sex change living with another man and his wife....
When you think about it, there is even less Biblical opposition to polygamy than to homosexuality. In fact, as far as I know there is no Biblical condemnation of polygamy. In fact, you could say there is downright support for polygamy--the patriarchs were polygamous. Christians in Africa might support it as it is a part of their recent traditions. The Mormons would support it.
Liberal Christians would say, 'Isn't this a better alternative to divorce?' Instead of Sally divorcing John and marrying Harry she could just marry Harry too. That way the children would have not just one father but two! Wouldn't that be great! What a great big, loving family! Utilitarian arguments for polygamy are endless. By marrying extra wives or husbands you cut divorce costs, you lower your overheads, you can combine incomes and have a better standard of living, more hands to help with the children and housework, a renewal of the extended family... blah blah blah...
Think of the benefit for relationships. If George is married to Mildred, but admits that he sometimes has homosexual inclinations he doesn't need to sneak around and be hypocritial and deceitful. He doesn't need to 'repress' his sexuality. He can just marry his boyfriend and that way they can all be 'fulfilled.'
Liberal Theologians will call this 'triune marriage'. They will spin theories about how this reflects the Holy Trinity, and how it is a fuller, richer and more mature understanding of Christian marriage. Sexologists will explain how a marriage with homosexuality as an integral part will enhance and fulfill the 'maleness' and 'femaleness' in all the partners.
You know, without any authority and with a bit of imagination, you can make elephants fly.
To those people I say: I hate to say "I told you so," but...I told you so.
Interesting that you should point this out. Many of us are wondering WHERE is the reaction of the USCCB or the Vatican to the Supreme Court ruling? Check the USCCB web site or Zenit News Agency and you will find no comments! NONE! The silence is deafening.
But the Pope sure jumped up and sang when we got on the "Road to Baghdad".
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.