None are so blind as those who refuse to see.
1 posted on
05/27/2008 1:50:51 PM PDT by
dvan
To: dvan
Blind? Maybe.
Selfish? Most likely.
Evil? Some are - those would be the ones that know what this will do to society and promote it because of that very fact.
2 posted on
05/27/2008 1:54:50 PM PDT by
MrB
(You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
To: dvan
Same sex marriage would be a vast, untested experiment inflicted upon society and its principal victims will be the children. So much for the liberals putting them first. Instead, they put adult sexual desires first. That's really looking out for future generations!
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
3 posted on
05/27/2008 1:55:27 PM PDT by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: dvan
(there are no illegitimate children) What's a bastard?
4 posted on
05/27/2008 1:57:51 PM PDT by
DungeonMaster
(Obamafeld, "A CAMPAIGN ABOUT NOTHING".)
To: dvan
From the article: “The state endorses marriage primarily because of what marriage does for children and in turn society.”
Before we tear down fences, we need to remember why they were put up in the first place.
6 posted on
05/27/2008 2:16:55 PM PDT by
keats5
(tolerance of intolerant people is cultural suicide)
To: dvan
7 posted on
05/27/2008 2:18:10 PM PDT by
LowOiL
("I don't need Mr. Keyes lecturing me on Christianity. That's why I have a pastor." — Barack Obama)
To: dvan
Last I checked, you don't need to be married to have children. And most gays, when they marry, won't have children. So I don't follow the writer's argument. But I think the solution is "civil unions" for gay people (no automatic right to adopt children)—there might be a societal benefit to encouraging gays to be in committed, caring relationships (it might reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS, although it is true that many gays have "open" relationships).
To: dvan
I find that the reasons gay marriage advocates give seem a bit contrived. The "benefits" they claim to want could just as well be fought for outside of marriage, without mangling its legal definition. Citizenship, hospital visitation rights, whatever. It's more likely they want the legal power and recognition of a government-endorsed institution to further push their agenda. Legal power to sue schools and churches for discrimination, for instance. Any sane society doesn't want "alternative" behavior endorsed and encouraged by the government, if they want to stay a sane one, anyway.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson