Posted on 08/10/2010 10:32:50 AM PDT by NYer
You left out quite a few, probably through good taste.
Pedophilia, incest, necrophilia and ad nauseum would be legal as well.
The whole thing is a ploy by the LBGTQ types to legally force the rest of us to respect and honor them, regardless of our feelings. They want to force approval of their perversion. If they're successful, every perversion will demand equal treatment.
Sorry, but the line needs to be drawn here. We must tell the homosexuals "Sorry. You don't have the right to force everybody to approve of your perversion. Period."
And make it stick.
No, it's essentially just a matter of one group wanting to do something, and demanding that others approve.
What I see in the real estate business, single moms get the worst of it. The guys almost always disappear when they find out raising a child is not easy and requires a change in lifestyle. Would it be so bad for responsible men that can shoulder the burden to have multiple wives?
I no longer believe that to be the case.
Thirty years ago NOBODY would have believed that homosexuals would be allowed to marry. How big a leap from there is polygamy? What is the real difference between two women marrying and a man marrying two or more women?
Starting in the 60s the left came up with the "free love" movement complete with "open marriages." By the 1980s society had reached a point where unmarried people living together was no longer considered taboo by many. During this same time homosexuality was forced on society and we were told that homosexuals were "born this way," eventually much of society stopped considering homosexuality to be taboo. Now they are forcing homosexuality on us. But, what people don't realize is that this was NEVER about having "equal marriage rights," it was about DESTROYING the institution of marriage altogether. Keep in mind that the people telling us that we shouldn't be bothered by homosexual marriage are the EXACT SAME PEOPLE who told us twenty or thirty years ago that marriage wasn't necessary between men and women and that it made more sense to live together unmarried and avoid divorce.
Do not doubt for a minute that the agenda of the secular left has changed, this is just a new tactic.
Pretty much the same.
I agree that most people see the sense of it, but we have an imperial ruling class that over rules the will of the people. The judiciary is just one segment of this imperial ruling class. At some point people will say enough.
They love to talk about being allowed to visit each other in the hospital. I have been waiting for years for someone to give me the name of just one hospital that has a policy that prohibits homosexuals from visiting each other.
Yes
Now the question is why does one group want to stop the other group from doing something. In this case I think there are a lot of reasons that a society should say no to homosexual marriage. The top reason from my perspective being God doesn't want any of us doing it, so society should not be promoting it.
I believe that God knows what we are going to do, including our sexual proclivities, even before He creates us. I don’t believe our sexual orientation matters much to Him.
Great example, nobody denies someone access. Also, how hard is it to set up a health proxy, or to arrange that all your assets are owned equally, or to make someone the beneficiary of your life insurance, or executor of your estate.
If the "imperial ruling class" forces the country into this, how long will it be before the affluent homosexuals realize that by living with someone long enough they become your common law spouse and have rights to your wealth.
I can give you the names of two hospitals in soCal, from personal experience, who do not allow non-family members into ICU patient rooms.
There is a difference between orientation and doing something. In the case of homosexuality it's pretty clear the act is not smiled on.
Even pedophiles?
And are you certain that this extends to unmarried "partners"?
Exactly. You can name ANYONE on a health proxy, own property jointly with ANYONE and make ANYONE a beneficiary of an insurance policy or an heir to your estate.
This is like saying that God knows what genocidal maniacs, mass murderers, rapists and the like are going to do before He creates them and it "doesn't matter much to him."
Kinda throws out that whole "they won't let me see my partner" nonsense doesn't it!
The whole issue has nothing to do with having the same benefits as married couples. They can establish all the same legal obligations and protections if they really want to. The issue is about status. They want homosexuality considered "normal". It's not.
As far as I know the legal protections are already there and have been for centuries. Keep in mind that it wasn’t that long ago that women weren’t allowed to own or inherit property under many forms of Common Law, men have ALWAYS been allowed to leave property to other men and legal partnerships have been recognized for centuries.
I’ve been to visit far more non-relatives in hospitals than relatives, unless they are in ICU or CCU I’ve always just walked right in. Nobody in the hospital cares what your relationship is.
I’m not certain of anything except what the nurse told me. If you really need verification, I suggest you call around.
Barry McGuire - Eve of Destruction
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntLsElbW9Xo
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.