But, my opinion is that there's a better way to make sure that people have equal rights...and that's to get the government OUT of the marriage business altogether.

Marriage is a social contract, a religious contract, a family contract, and/or many other things. What it is not, is something that needs approval from politicians.

Even if we succeed in this battle and find a bunch of politicians who will uphold these rights and allow gay marriage, the power will still exist for future politicians to take it away. The best protection from intrusions of rights is to eliminate the power they wield to take them....

That's my rant. Some follow up reading on this if anyone's interested:

"Here's How to Defend Marriage" - click here

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think Michael Boldin illustrates an excellent principle, that government simply should not have the power to interfere in our personal lives. The only ethical view of government I can think of is a government that only intervenes for matters that are genuinely relevant to the public good, in a manner that violates the rights of no-one. A government that can regulate marriage is one of many egregious violations of this principle in our government today. Opponents of gay-marriage claim that it is a slippery slope to polygamous marriages and the like, and I say "So what?". The government has no business imposing the subjective values of any group on any other that doesn't share those values, and as such should honor any voluntary agreement among individuals that does not infringe upon the rights of anyone else. And no, people whose religious beliefs include the belief that homosexuality or whatever consensual act is sinful do NOT have a right to discriminate that can be infringed upon. Keep your moral indignation in the private arena where it belongs, and where your right to free speech is protected, and refrain from poisoning our civil society with your seeking special authority from our government, which is unlawful, and which is all this movement to "defend marriage" is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

and only between a man and a woman.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

and only between a man and a woman.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just as until the last decade the word HOMOPHOBIC didn't exist.

Homosexuals can create their own language, create their own
lives, create whatever they want. They cannot create Marriage. The law did not create Marriage and cannot sanctify a union of the same sex.

No matter if you like it or not, marriage is derived from scripture and a Marriage is only ordained of the creator between a man and a woman.

I don't care what the polls show. Just shows the decline in any moral value that the young people of this country may have had at one point and time.

The day homosexuals are granted the same rights under law is the day the United States becomes a complete abomination to any and all peoples of any spiritual belief system within this country.

You cannot beg a government to create that in which it never created in the first place. Even if the United States ever made a law that granted such, it would not be a Marriage in the eyes of whom created Marriage.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A thin, multi-pierced young man with a green blaze in his hair is walking down a high school corridor. He approaches a hulking figure, in this case the school's starting defensive tackle, who is noisily slamming shut his locker. “Hey Dude, do you know which room the gay lesbian meeting's in?" "Yeh, go up that stairwell and turn right. You'll see it."

Neither young man gives this hallway exchange a moment's thought or reflection. The point is that, comparatively speaking, young people give less and less a fig about gay-lesbian activities, including whether or not G-L's appropriate the word marriage to consummate their emotional and contractual needs.

What exists now is that a high percentage of older voters are against gay marriage thus controlling the voting outcome on this issue. With certitude, this will change as seniors leave the voting rolls and youth join. Polling will not only confirm this trend but also actuarially divine the future year in which the majority of American voters will vote to allow gay marriage.

((cognitorex blogspot - posted two years ago, actually))

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]