The Secular Case Against Gay Marriage

scooby_monsters_1024x768.jpg




Ruh roh...



​
​





"America has same-sex marriage because of Mitt Romney...For time and eternity, Mitt Romney will go down in history as the man who abused the power of his office to give the United States homosexual matrimony."




http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/fischer/110604
 
WinterBorn said:
When this country started, didn't the definition include "same race"?
Click to expand...

no.....as pointed out earlier if it had, the misogynistic laws would not have been passed....they wouldn't have been deemed necessary by those opposed to mixed race marriages....
 
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet said:
of course he is.....do you have evidence the definition of marriage was not one man and one woman at any time between say the landing of the Pilgrims and now?......
Click to expand...

It's in the link i helpfully provided.

The Dutch Marriage Bill Article 30, Book1 of the Civil Code.
1.A marriage can be contracted by two persons of different sex or of the same sex.
Click to expand...

Definitions change over time. You may have noticed this phenomenon in the time you have been breathing the fresh air of this wonderfully gay world (do you see what i did there, eh?).
 
charver said:
It's in the link i helpfully provided.



Definitions change over time. You may have noticed this phenomenon in the time you have been breathing the fresh air of this wonderfully gay world (do you see what i did there, eh?).
Click to expand...

why would it help....its about the law in the Netherlands, not the USA.....granted, we have some idiots on the left TRYING to change the law....but that's what we're arguing about.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
why would it help....its about the law in the Netherlands, not the USA.....granted, we have some idiots on the left TRYING to change the law....but that's what we're arguing about.....
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing at all. I'm simply answering the question you asked. If you don't like the answer then there's little i can do about that.

Whether you like it or not the US will go down the Dutch route of public acceptance of 'gay marriage' and the laws will change accordingly. It may well take a long time and you may well be lucky enough to be deceased when it does but come it will and, somehow, the world will carry on.
 
WinterBorn said:
Yes. And wouldn't those laws be considered changing the definition of marriage?
Click to expand...

no....the definition of marriage (one man, one woman) is the same....the laws prohibited a marriage that fit the definition......there isn't any law "prohibiting" marriages between two men. It's that they don't meet the requirements unless the definition changes.....
 
charver said:
I'm not arguing at all. I'm simply answering the question you asked. If you don't like the answer then there's little i can do about that.

Whether you like it or not the US will go down the Dutch route of public acceptance of 'gay marriage' and the laws will change accordingly. It may well take a long time and you may well be lucky enough to be deceased when it does but come it will and, somehow, the world will carry on.
Click to expand...

but you didn't answer the question.......I said the definition had not changed since this country began......this country is not the Netherlands.....the fact that people currently are working toward changing the definition is what raised the argument, not the answer to it........

as to the rest I expect you are right.....the degradation of society seems inevitable.......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
no....the definition of marriage (one man, one woman) is the same....the laws prohibited a marriage that fit the definition......there isn't any law "prohibiting" marriages between two men. It's that they don't meet the requirements unless the definition changes.....
Click to expand...

So having laws that only said one man & one woman, and changing those laws to say only one man & one woman of the same race, is not changing the definition?
 
PostmodernProphet said:
but you didn't answer the question.......I said the definition had not changed since this country began......this country is not the Netherlands.....the fact that people currently are working toward changing the definition is what raised the argument, not the answer to it........

as to the rest I expect you are right.....the degradation of society seems inevitable.......
Click to expand...

Is "this is the way its always been" really such a good argument? Few things survive without change. And this is not change for the sake of change. This is change to include those who have been shunned for centuries.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
but you didn't answer the question.......I said the definition had not changed since this country began......this country is not the Netherlands.....the fact that people currently are working toward changing the definition is what raised the argument, not the answer to it........

as to the rest I expect you are right.....the degradation of society seems inevitable.......
Click to expand...

No mate, i answered this question.

do you have evidence the definition of marriage was not one man and one woman at any time between say the landing of the Pilgrims and now?......
Click to expand...

You may have meant to ask a different question with geographical restrictions but didn't.

Pedantry is great isn't it?
 
WinterBorn said:
Is "this is the way its always been" really such a good argument? Few things survive without change. And this is not change for the sake of change. This is change to include those who have been shunned for centuries.
Click to expand...

You can't deny it, WB.

Ever since those black folks got this 'equality' bidness into their heads and women started asking for property rights and voting rights and even the right not be raped by their husbands (as if such a thing were even possible) the world has become a much bleaker place.

Whatever happened to the good old days, where a man was free to burn a witch, spit at an unmarried mother and rape a slave before church. Things definitely aren't what they used to be.

Change? Communism more like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top