I made two responses:
Bob Parks: "... but from what I’ve read I’m not sure Jesus would’ve refer to gays as “abominations”, shun and condemn them to eternal hellfire. I believe he’d show them love and try to find a way to work with them."and
No one is calling "gays" abominations -- however, the behavior (that no one seems to want to talk about) is an abomination.
An unrepentant homosexual has *chosen* eternal death ... you know, the same as an unrepentant "player" has or an unrepentant slut has.
How does one "work with" those who insist that their abominable behavior must not only be tolerated, but must be publically celebrated ... and that they must be given access to groom children ... other than by shunning them?
No one is stopping "gays" from marrying. No law prevents it; no one even asks about the sexual preferences the man and woman applying for the marriage license.
The laws on marriage simply require that:
1) there be exactly two and only two parties involved;
2) the two parties be of opposite sex;
3) the two parties be of at least a certain age;
4) the two parties not be related to a prohibited degree.
That's all. And these conditions apply to *everyone* -- thus, the "civil rights" angle is fundamentally and deliberately dishonest.
If requirement 2) can be thrown away for the dishonest rationales being advanced by the "gay" activists, then so can any of the other requirements, and for the same rationales.
"Gay" "marriage" isn't about "equal rights", it's about allowing the leftists to destroy marriage.
Edit 2013/03/27:
Bob Parks: "And for those who say gay marriage degrades the “sanctity of marriage”, tell ya what: if any gay marriage has the power to degrade what you have with the person you’ve wed, your marriage has issues. Should I ever get married again, no gay couple will ever have that kind of power over us."
This is incorrect -- it's also a favorite (dishonest) leftist takling point. And conservatives really need to free their minds of the leftist indoctrination in which we all have been marinated from birth.
Contrary to the claims of the "gay" activists, "gay" "marriage" isn't at all about equality before the law -- I've shown the falseness of that in my prior post. Rather, "gay" "marriage" is about redefining what marriage is. Ultimately, as with so much else of the leftist agenda, "gay" "marriage" is about *destroying* marriage, but that point is what I mean to explore here.
"Gay" "marriage" certainly will have "the power to degrade what you have with the person you’ve wed"; this is because the imposition of it changes what marriage is and means.
At one time, and not all that long ago, it was very difficult to formally end a marriage. This is because, whereas now there are four legal requirements for contracting a marriage, before "no fault" divorce, marriage really was a legally binding contract, of which the requirements for entrance were:
1) there be exactly two and only two parties involved;
2) the two parties be of opposite sex;
3) the two parties be of at least a mimimum age;
4) the two parties not be related to a prohibited degree;
5a) the two parties agree that the marriage relationship is sexually exclusive
5b) and life-long.
With the imposition of "no fault" divorce, everyone's marriage was affected, everyone's marriage changed, everyone's marriage was "degraded".
How can any thinking and honest man imagine that "gay" "marriage" won't "degrade" everyone's marriages, and in wholly unforseen ways?
When the same emotive "arguments" being advanced to justify the fiat imposition of "gay" "marriage" upon society are advanced to justify polygamous "marriages", will you also claim that polygamous "marriages" cannot "degrade" your own hypothetical marriage?
When the same emotive "arguments" being advanced to justify the fiat imposition of "gay" "marriage" upon society are advanced to justify polyamorous "marriages", will you also claim that polyamorous "marriages" cannot "degrade" your own hypothetical marriage?
When the same emotive "arguments" being advanced to justify the fiat imposition of "gay" "marriage" upon society are advanced to justify incestuous "marriages", will you also claim that incestuous "marriages" cannot "degrade" your own hypothetical marriage?
When the same emotive "arguments" being advanced to justify the fiat imposition of "gay" "marriage" upon society are advanced to justify beastiality "marriages", will you also claim that beastiality "marriages" cannot "degrade" your own hypothetical marriage?
7 comments:
But it's worse than you know. Seen this un-monderated platform supplied by the Gospel Coalition?
Jesus quoted the Old Testament law in Matthew 7:10 to advocate the death penalty for people who curse their parents. There is no reason to think that he would not have similarly advocated the death penalty for homosexuals. The whole gay "marriage" issue only arises because our society has already concluded that homosexuality cannot be deemed a crime whatsoever.
Correction: It's Mark, not Matthew
Joan, the link doesn't seem to want to open here at work. I won't be able to look at it until I get home this weekend.
But, yes, things are very bad -- because, as I keep saying, even most of those who consider themselves conservative (and who are hated by the "liberals" for it) are thoroughly co-opted by leftism. As witness Mr Parks, who essentially disagrees with "gay" "marriage", trotting out the old dishonest leftist "argument" that if "gay" "marriage" can affect *your* marriage, that your marriage has deeper problems.
I've added further comments relating to the "it won't affect your marriage" argument.
It's like saying that if the Fed's printing of money can affect *your* money, then your money has deeper problems. It's sort of a dumb argument.
I think that's a good analogy, Drew.
The thing about running the printing presses at the Fed is that the money so spawned has exactly the same effect on the economy as a whole, and on the worth of everyone else's money, as the counterfeit money that comes out of someone’s basement. That the money churned out by the Fed has the blessing of the government doesn’t change the reality of the damage it does to everyone else.
In the case of “gay” “marriage”, the “marriages” so spawned are counterfeit. That they will have the blessing – and the violent force – of the government vouching for their genuineness does not make them any less counterfeit.
A society’s material economy must unravel, and everyone suffer, when the money is counterfeit. A society’s spiritual economy must unravel, and everyone suffer, when the marriages – the foundational building-blocks of the wider social order – are counterfeit.
Post a Comment