(Why are gay lobbyists encouraged to promote their lifestyle while born-again Christians are called "bigots" for promoting theirs?)
Many liberals are wringing their hands because conservative Christians refuse to allow them to re-define “marriage” to accommodate the latest evolution in the destruction of our society. They simply can’t understand the harm in allowing same-sex marriages. Their belief system prevents them from seeing the obvious damages that would be caused by opening up the institution of "marriage" to the whim of each person's definition. Under the guise of “equal rights” the gay lobby is attempting to garner “extra rights’ for its constituency. Neither the United States constitution, nor its creators, ever intended to destroy the traditional family, either in letter or in spirit. Certainly there are measures of protection for individuals in our constitution that are designed to make all men equal. But protections are instituted to serve the majority in our system of government as well. In fact, if a few twisted men attempt to take advantage of the freedoms afforded by our constitution to the detriment of our society, the founding fathers made safeguards, like the "constitutional amendment," to protect the vast majority.
Some suggest we should allow same-sex marriages because it seems to be the right thing to do when two people “love” one another. Isn’t that what individual freedom is all about? If the very essence of freedom is to "do right," then "right" must be defined. It is not right for the gay lobby to destroy the traditional American family by hi-jacking the institution of marriage. It is not wrong to fight to protect your country from those who attempt to further erode America's moral compass into a sea of anarchy in the name of democracy. If “love” were the only requirement of even heterosexual marriages we would be stranded on an island of chaos. If “freedom” is hard to define, try defining “love.”
Same-sex marriage is not only unnecessary but is also an open door to mass confusion. The gay lobby suggests that the states should have the right to decide the matter themselves. I agree that the state congressmen should be allowed to do so: not the local judges or city majors. By a vast margin, every state in the union would define marriage as between a man and a woman. Even if one state begins to allow same-sex marriages, the gay lobby knows perfectly well that there are already laws on the books that require all states to recognize marriages that occur in other states. That is why many “run off” to Las Vegas—or states with more easily obtainable marriage licenses—to get married. The gay lobby understands this and is disingenuous when suggesting to the less informed that each state could make its own decision concerning marriage. To defenders of traditional marriages, the possible harm to an institution we hold dear is evident.
Those who defend traditional marriages are vilified for speaking up. They are called “haters,” “bigots,” and other derogatory names. Every other element of society is championed for standing up for what they believe. Why are the gay lobbyists encouraged to promote their lifestyle while born-again Christians are called bigots for promoting theirs? Who are the real bigots here? The only group of people it is still politically correct to malign is conservative Christians. Believe it or not, conservative Christians have rights, too: including the freedom of expression.
Want to review or comment on this article?
Need a FREE Reader Membership?
Reviewed by Brodie Houlette (Reader)
Reviewed on December 2, 2004
Eddie
I'm relieved that I reside in Canada, because with people such as yourself living in the world I am truly frightened. I have never been able to understand why people continue to judge each other, and have this moral superiority complex over each other. It's times like this that I am reminded by a passage from the Matthew 7:1-2: Judge not, that ye be not judged. 2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
Why can't we all just live in harmony and tolerate each other's differences. Why do we still continue to look for skapegoats and minority groups to oppress. We go from one group to another, first the African-American minority group, then People of the Jewish faith with the now infamous "Jesus Killer", then Women and now the GLBTQ Community.
As a Sociology major in University, I sickens me when one group uses another to shield itself from it's own flaws. With the marriage debate, how can the GLBTQ destory marriage where 10% of the population of the United States is divorced. I just think it's time for the final separation of Church and State, not everyone in the World is Christian, in fact only 1 Billion of the World's 6.3 Billion are Christian. The GLBTQ question is just a good distraction for the real societial problem of divorce and the decreasing value of relationships in modern society.
You are obviously not receiving the personal letters I am sending to you so I will address you in this forum. You really have no idea exactly how huge a nerve the idea of destroying the traditional marriage structure strikes in me. My profession demands that I deal with the product of a dysfunctional society. By my calling, I am assigned the task of cleaning up the messes left over by selfish human beings who abuse their “rights” to the hurt of others. You have read enough of my opinion to understand that my view is more than simply religious, although I have no reason to hide from my religious beliefs in this issue, just as you have no reason to hide from your own beliefs. You can attack conservative Christians all you want, but always remember it was Christians who formed the backbone of this country over the years, who formed a union based on Biblical principles, with a national conscious formed on the Christian ideals of mercy, grace, love, tolerance, and brotherly kindness, to insure those very rights we have in this country.
As for my arguments not being based in law, the push for a constitutional amendment is as basic a principle of the process of law as our nation affords. There is nothing noble in those who parse the letter of the law to twist from it an argument for their own personal agendas. Homosexuals already have equal rights. When it comes to marriage, they want extra rights. The argument is given: marriage is already a failing institution. Why deny homosexuals the chance at marriage? We don’t destroy people just because they are wounded. We don’t close the doors of our businesses simply because we operated in the red one month. We do what we can to heal, to repair, to fix. We don’t order the death knell for every institution that falters. Neither should we put another nail into the coffin of the institution of marriage because it isn’t perfect today. Opening the door to homosexual marriages will do nothing to affect my own, but it will forever have an influence upon the future of the institution and its potential for helping our society.
I regret your personal pain and sorrow. I have no problem with your partner being able to visit you in the hospital if you were desperately sick I am a man moved with compassion for every human who suffers from the cruelty of other human beings. My chosen profession pits me in battle against such human cruelty every day. I minister to battered wives, ignored and abused children, widows who have lost their reason for living, and the less fortunate among us. I spend my days staring into the hopeless eyes and broken hearts of struggling fellow human beings, including, by the way, many homosexuals. A huge enemy to the human condition is the losing battle we wage to save the traditional family structure which study after study concludes is the ideal environment for nurturing children. Not those that malfunction. Not those based on selfishness that end up in dysfunction. I truly hope you get to have every opportunity in the world to be happy, sharing your life with the person of your choice. But there are ways to do that without destroying the historically proven backbone of civilized societies: the traditional family. Although I desire to see you happy, just as I desire to see those to whom I minister daily happy, I do not believe we should offer this happiness to you at the detriment of our society, especially when there are already legal remedies you can pursue.
Reviewed by Joe Blaine (Reader)
Reviewed on August 16, 2004
Your fourth article on gay marriage. This subject must severely hit a nerve with you Eddie. Your argument is religious, Vincent's argument is legal and mine is personal. So let me come at you from a personal level.
Your wrong. What you feel is wrong. Your intentions are wrong. Your mindset (concerning gay marriage) is wrong. Deep down you know this.
But let me tell you why your wrong. Your wrong because you have have a passionate yet ignorant opinion, view, data, whatever you call it about gays, lesbians and bisexuals. How many gay people have you known to honestly say, "They don't deserve the same rights as us." ?
Let me be presumptuous and say, little to none. So how can you sit there and say, "Listen to my opinion", when you have no clue what your talking about?
No one likes to realize they are wrong. But when that happens (and it happens with all of us) it's up to us how we handle it.
I've been with my boyfriend for 6 years. I also know how his mother feels about us. She tolerates her son being gay, but she doesn't accept it. There is a BIG difference. If something happened to him, what would I do? I'm 23, he's 34. To be honest, he has kind of been a father figure in my life. (I knew my real father for a short time) His mother could come in, seize property that we bought together , sell it at a huge loss and stick me with the remaining debt for households/property that I no longer own. At 23, I wouldn't have a clue what to do. If he broke his leg, I would be denied hospital visitation, and if his mother wished, be excluded from the hospital room altogether. She could even make decisions about his treatment that would be damaging to him! And I would have no say so.
Why someone would let these types of senarios continue is beyond me. And for someone (such as yourself) to say God condones putting people through hell like this, is just a slap in the face. And you wonder why gay people have problems with conservative Christians....
Your arguments are terribly weak and lacking in fact. Why not just admit it. There is not any reason to keep other people (in this case gays and lesbians) from doing what they want as long as they're not hurting the person or property of another.
In the meantime I'll be packing my bags for Canada, as I imagine most other people that are sick of being denied their rights. - Joe
Reviewed by Vincent Martin (Reader)
Reviewed on August 9, 2004
Eddie—
I applaud the passion and eloquence you bring to this argument, but your logic is lacking. Saying that allowing Gays and Lesbian to marry will harm the institution of marriage doesn’t make it so. Do you have any empirical or documented evidence of this alleged harm? Without it, your argument hardly stands. Because as I have repeatedly stated, when it comes to the many states’ regulation of the institution of marriage, this is a matter of law, not morality, and the church has no say. Without a showing of harm, legally the state has not compelling interest in preventing gay marriage. I find amending the constitution and enshrining discrimination into it foundational principles repugnant as would any citizen who truly understood the nature of freedom and equality.
And I would submit that “Christians” are doing great harm to the Institution of marriage all on their own; how dare you (and they) now accuse others of doing harm. Should the heterosexual community be allowed to completely destroy the American family with their skewed morals and principles that would have them worship material good over a spiritual God?
And how would allowing Gay marriage erode the moral compass of America? Isn’t Newt Gringh (sp), that stellar Republican and Christian who left his wife on her sickbed (violating his scared marriage vows) to take up with another woman, who he was having an affair with outside the bounds of his marriage? What harm did that do to the institution of marriage?
You stated: “Even if one state begins to allow same-sex marriages, the gay lobby knows perfectly well that there are already laws on the books that require all states to recognize marriages that occur in other states.” The feebleminded Defense of Marriage Act prevents that. To wit:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the " Defense of Marriage Act" .
SECTION 2. POWERS RESERVED TO THE STATES.
(a) IN GENERAL.-CHAPTER 115 OF TITLE 28, UNITED STATES CODE, IS AMENDED BY ADDING AFTER SECTION 1738B THE FOLLOWING:
"1738C. Certain acts, records, and proceedings and the effect thereof
"No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.".
SECTION 3. DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE.
(a) IN GENERAL.-CHAPTER 1 OF TITLE 1, UNITED STATES CODE, IS AMENDED BY ADDING AT THE END THE FOLLOWING:
"7. Definition of 'marriage' and 'spouse'
"In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife."
Perhaps “born-again” Christian would not be labeled “bigots” if they were satisfied to live their lives without trying to impose their lifestyle on the rest of the populace. After all, jumping on school boards and insisting that creationism be taught in the public school is a clear violation of the first amendment, but Christians pay little heed to that little detail. And if you and yours don’t believe in pre-martial sex, good for you, but do not through sex education class, try to foist that believe down the throats of other by insisting that abstinence only information be taught. That is sheer folly, and completely dismisses hundreds of thousands of years of human biology.
I am all for Christians (I am one), exercising their rights, including freedom of expression. But in so doing don’t deny other people the right to live their lives as they see fit. That is the essence of freedom.
AMEN, BROTHER! PREACH IT!! Thanks for a courageous stand on this; I too, am against gay marriage; always have been! It's an abomination of God's Holy Word, and above all, it is a SIN!
(((HUGS))) and much love, your friend in Tx., Karen Lynn. :(
Democratic Dilemmas and Divine Inspiration examines the significance or relevance of the idea that the U.S. Constitution was, as many believe, divinely inspired. How much did that belief matter to founders of the nation and how much does it matter no
I'm relieved that I reside in Canada, because with people such as yourself living in the world I am truly frightened. I have never been able to understand why people continue to judge each other, and have this moral superiority complex over each other. It's times like this that I am reminded by a passage from the Matthew 7:1-2: Judge not, that ye be not judged. 2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
Why can't we all just live in harmony and tolerate each other's differences. Why do we still continue to look for skapegoats and minority groups to oppress. We go from one group to another, first the African-American minority group, then People of the Jewish faith with the now infamous "Jesus Killer", then Women and now the GLBTQ Community.
As a Sociology major in University, I sickens me when one group uses another to shield itself from it's own flaws. With the marriage debate, how can the GLBTQ destory marriage where 10% of the population of the United States is divorced. I just think it's time for the final separation of Church and State, not everyone in the World is Christian, in fact only 1 Billion of the World's 6.3 Billion are Christian. The GLBTQ question is just a good distraction for the real societial problem of divorce and the decreasing value of relationships in modern society.
As for my arguments not being based in law, the push for a constitutional amendment is as basic a principle of the process of law as our nation affords. There is nothing noble in those who parse the letter of the law to twist from it an argument for their own personal agendas. Homosexuals already have equal rights. When it comes to marriage, they want extra rights. The argument is given: marriage is already a failing institution. Why deny homosexuals the chance at marriage? We don’t destroy people just because they are wounded. We don’t close the doors of our businesses simply because we operated in the red one month. We do what we can to heal, to repair, to fix. We don’t order the death knell for every institution that falters. Neither should we put another nail into the coffin of the institution of marriage because it isn’t perfect today. Opening the door to homosexual marriages will do nothing to affect my own, but it will forever have an influence upon the future of the institution and its potential for helping our society.
I regret your personal pain and sorrow. I have no problem with your partner being able to visit you in the hospital if you were desperately sick I am a man moved with compassion for every human who suffers from the cruelty of other human beings. My chosen profession pits me in battle against such human cruelty every day. I minister to battered wives, ignored and abused children, widows who have lost their reason for living, and the less fortunate among us. I spend my days staring into the hopeless eyes and broken hearts of struggling fellow human beings, including, by the way, many homosexuals. A huge enemy to the human condition is the losing battle we wage to save the traditional family structure which study after study concludes is the ideal environment for nurturing children. Not those that malfunction. Not those based on selfishness that end up in dysfunction. I truly hope you get to have every opportunity in the world to be happy, sharing your life with the person of your choice. But there are ways to do that without destroying the historically proven backbone of civilized societies: the traditional family. Although I desire to see you happy, just as I desire to see those to whom I minister daily happy, I do not believe we should offer this happiness to you at the detriment of our society, especially when there are already legal remedies you can pursue.
Your wrong. What you feel is wrong. Your intentions are wrong. Your mindset (concerning gay marriage) is wrong. Deep down you know this.
But let me tell you why your wrong. Your wrong because you have have a passionate yet ignorant opinion, view, data, whatever you call it about gays, lesbians and bisexuals. How many gay people have you known to honestly say, "They don't deserve the same rights as us." ?
Let me be presumptuous and say, little to none. So how can you sit there and say, "Listen to my opinion", when you have no clue what your talking about?
No one likes to realize they are wrong. But when that happens (and it happens with all of us) it's up to us how we handle it.
I've been with my boyfriend for 6 years. I also know how his mother feels about us. She tolerates her son being gay, but she doesn't accept it. There is a BIG difference. If something happened to him, what would I do? I'm 23, he's 34. To be honest, he has kind of been a father figure in my life. (I knew my real father for a short time) His mother could come in, seize property that we bought together , sell it at a huge loss and stick me with the remaining debt for households/property that I no longer own. At 23, I wouldn't have a clue what to do. If he broke his leg, I would be denied hospital visitation, and if his mother wished, be excluded from the hospital room altogether. She could even make decisions about his treatment that would be damaging to him! And I would have no say so.
Why someone would let these types of senarios continue is beyond me. And for someone (such as yourself) to say God condones putting people through hell like this, is just a slap in the face. And you wonder why gay people have problems with conservative Christians....
Your arguments are terribly weak and lacking in fact. Why not just admit it. There is not any reason to keep other people (in this case gays and lesbians) from doing what they want as long as they're not hurting the person or property of another.
In the meantime I'll be packing my bags for Canada, as I imagine most other people that are sick of being denied their rights. - Joe
I applaud the passion and eloquence you bring to this argument, but your logic is lacking. Saying that allowing Gays and Lesbian to marry will harm the institution of marriage doesn’t make it so. Do you have any empirical or documented evidence of this alleged harm? Without it, your argument hardly stands. Because as I have repeatedly stated, when it comes to the many states’ regulation of the institution of marriage, this is a matter of law, not morality, and the church has no say. Without a showing of harm, legally the state has not compelling interest in preventing gay marriage. I find amending the constitution and enshrining discrimination into it foundational principles repugnant as would any citizen who truly understood the nature of freedom and equality.
And I would submit that “Christians” are doing great harm to the Institution of marriage all on their own; how dare you (and they) now accuse others of doing harm. Should the heterosexual community be allowed to completely destroy the American family with their skewed morals and principles that would have them worship material good over a spiritual God?
And how would allowing Gay marriage erode the moral compass of America? Isn’t Newt Gringh (sp), that stellar Republican and Christian who left his wife on her sickbed (violating his scared marriage vows) to take up with another woman, who he was having an affair with outside the bounds of his marriage? What harm did that do to the institution of marriage?
You stated: “Even if one state begins to allow same-sex marriages, the gay lobby knows perfectly well that there are already laws on the books that require all states to recognize marriages that occur in other states.” The feebleminded Defense of Marriage Act prevents that. To wit:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the " Defense of Marriage Act" .
SECTION 2. POWERS RESERVED TO THE STATES.
(a) IN GENERAL.-CHAPTER 115 OF TITLE 28, UNITED STATES CODE, IS AMENDED BY ADDING AFTER SECTION 1738B THE FOLLOWING:
"1738C. Certain acts, records, and proceedings and the effect thereof
"No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.".
SECTION 3. DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE.
(a) IN GENERAL.-CHAPTER 1 OF TITLE 1, UNITED STATES CODE, IS AMENDED BY ADDING AT THE END THE FOLLOWING:
"7. Definition of 'marriage' and 'spouse'
"In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife."
Perhaps “born-again” Christian would not be labeled “bigots” if they were satisfied to live their lives without trying to impose their lifestyle on the rest of the populace. After all, jumping on school boards and insisting that creationism be taught in the public school is a clear violation of the first amendment, but Christians pay little heed to that little detail. And if you and yours don’t believe in pre-martial sex, good for you, but do not through sex education class, try to foist that believe down the throats of other by insisting that abstinence only information be taught. That is sheer folly, and completely dismisses hundreds of thousands of years of human biology.
I am all for Christians (I am one), exercising their rights, including freedom of expression. But in so doing don’t deny other people the right to live their lives as they see fit. That is the essence of freedom.
(((HUGS))) and much love, your friend in Tx., Karen Lynn. :(