Posted on 04/20/2012 5:18:14 AM PDT by marshmallow
“We, as citizens, have a responsibility or “right,” to arbitrate, or to oversee the arbitration of, child custody disputes, and to define a legal marriage.”
As long as it coincides with what the institution actually is. There have been some states that have defined marriage as including two people of the same sex. Most by judges. Some by legislation. There are a number of states that barely passed pro-marriage amendments in the low 50% ranges, and the trend doesn’t look good as far as I can see. For the state, marriage is whatever most people think it is at any one time. Is gay marriage any more valid if most people agree that it isn’t an impossibility? That’s where the state involvement comes back to bite, at least in the modern era. It was always a danger.
And the state is never getting out of the institution. It would be giving up massive control of the culture, just not going to happen, in my opinion. I think what will happen is some faiths will just ignore the state and take the punishments that go with disagreeing with the gubberment about what is and is not a marriage.
Freegards
You know? I don’t know.
It’s is not the 1800s nor the 1900s. I too am disgusted but neither do I not want kNow of someone’s “genital contact” nor feel it is my business what they do with consenting adults behind closed doors.
I do know I do not wish to view it on tv. Nor do I want those people prostelitizing their lifestyle to children
I don’t have the answers
I don’t have an answer, either. I was just bringing up additional complications!
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.