Posted on 05/29/2015 6:48:25 AM PDT by shove_it
While I certainly accept that the notion of marriage as an institution (which has been around for most of human history) exists mostly for the purpose of raising children, that does not make it exclusive to couples who can/wish to/do raise children, and as such it doesn’t give it a legal leg to stand on. Of course gay marriage at the federal level hardly has a leg to stand on since marriage is not a constitutional right, but SCOTUS has a history of inventing rights if they think it is trendy, so I wouldn’t get my hopes up.
It seems pretty apparent that much of the push for gay marriage is simply for the destruction of traditional morality in general. They have been making steady progress on this for ages, and I don’t see anything stopping it here.
Probably the most ironic fact I consider is that if you think back to ancient Greece, where homosexuality was socially preferred (at least by the upper classes), they also had wives and marriages because they understood that was how you produced the next generation. The bizarre notion of gay marriage didn’t even occur to them.
You made your case.
For now I accept that God is in control and what will happen will happen.
I don’t know if this Supreme Court decision will rank up there with “Dred Scott” but we shall see.
Republican politicians are faking opposition with symbolic acts right now and placing a lot of faith and trust in them, emotional energy etc. etc. is foolish.
“It seems pretty apparent that much of the push for gay marriage is simply for the destruction of traditional morality in general.”
No doubt at all! That is the crux of the case before the Supreme Court whether they care or not.
“so I wouldn’t get my hopes up”
Sad but unfortunately true.
Thank you for your very good response.
The Left sets out to destroy the crucial institution of marriage and the Republicans respond with a plan to finish it off.
Only nine states & DC have common law marriage.
That is many.
Nine states and one district, out of 50? I guess that we have different ideas as to what constitutes “many”.
In the context of common law marriage in America, when people think that it doesn’t exist anymore, for instance post 69 that I was responding to, then yeah, 9 states and DC is many.
Is that what you want to argue about so badly, you didn’t like the way that I used the word ‘many’ in that post?
To: longtermmemmory
We still have common law marriage in many states in America, Texas for instance (and with no license),
With common law marriage you can call yourself married, but for it to be legal, you have to do it in a state that recognizes it, and meet the legal requirements of that state.
Making your relationship “legal” is a personal choice, just at it was 20 or 50 years ago.
72 posted on 5/29/2015, 12:15:52 PM by ansel12
I’m hardly interested in an argument, I’m sure I could find more interesting topics if I wanted to do so. I just don’t consider 9 states out of 50 to be all that large a number. That’s as much as I have to say on the matter.
It is relative, it isn’t a large number, but it is many, to people who think that common law marriage is dead in America, and something that ended in the old days.
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.