HOME | DD

Description
I could care less if a gay couple wants to live together. I could care less even more if they want to have a civil ceremony to celebrate their civil union. To me, it's no different than someone choosing a religion/belief system different from Christianity, or other such things. It's your life and God gave you free choice, so go nuts. Sure, I disagree, and I have my reasons for it, both of which I do not hesitate to voice: but it is your right to do as you wish. Just don't hurt other people or impede on their rights, and we'll be fine.

But what I don't like is when the government forces their definition of marriage onto everyone: whether they define it religiously and force it on homosexuals, or define it within a secular worldview and force it on those who are religious and believe otherwise. Government has NO business whatsoever defining marriage. Because the government has been meddling, we have churches that are getting sued and losing certain rights for politely refusing to hold homosexual unions, and gays are getting frustrated that people are forcing their views on them. Civil unions are within governmental jurisdiction, yes, but not marriage.

I would explain more, but a friend of mine worded it perfectly:

You could also ask when it became Constitutional to include gay couples in the concept of marriage, given that nobody even hazarded the concept until fairly recently. And given that gays can't bear children, or statistically nurture them as well as a married man and woman (to be fair, the same is true of divorced couples, or unmarried couples...), why should they get special advantages over say, two brothers living together who just want tax benefits? Why should we subsidize non-child-producing sex? Not to mention a lifestyle that knocks twice as many years off your life as smoking, which the government constantly runs ads on TV against and taxes to death.

I am willing to tolerate civil unions, as long as you have to be together for at least a year for benefits to kick in, and as long as civil unions are equally available to any grouping of two or more adults, regardless of physical relationship status. But don't mess with marriage. There are many good reasons why it is one man and one woman and not two men, one man and many women (where is the outrage over banning polygamy?), etc., and the federal government shouldn't be deciding this anyway, since anything that impacts religion is outside of their jurisdiction and should be left to the states to decide.

In the end, true marriage equality is when the government stays away from the subject, and lets individuals handle it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

This was made in response to this new fad, where people make their icons or avatars a red equal sign to advocate for "marriage equality". As a Libertarian and a Catholic, my response is "Marriage is a religious institution that is between the individuals involved and the church or other organization they are a part of. Government has no right to define it, or to force it's view on marriage onto the populace." So yeah. That's my stance on it.

Also, I am not trying to define marriage in this stamp. Yes, I have my beliefs about marriage, but that isn't the point. My point is that government has no right or jurisdiction in trying to define marriage and forcing it onto everyone under the false pretense of "equality". Hopefully that all makes sense.

God bless, yaaaa'll

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments are closed for a reason. I do not have time for debate, nor am I interested. If you are angry that comments are closed, just know that you are the reason why

However, if there is anything here I should fix, improve, add, etc, feel free to note me!

Description
I could care less if a gay couple wants to live together. I could care less even more if they want to have a civil ceremony to celebrate their civil union. To me, it's no different than someone choosing a religion/belief system different from Christianity, or other such things. It's your life and God gave you free choice, so go nuts. Sure, I disagree, and I have my reasons for it, both of which I do not hesitate to voice: but it is your right to do as you wish. Just don't hurt other people or impede on their rights, and we'll be fine.

But what I don't like is when the government forces their definition of marriage onto everyone: whether they define it religiously and force it on homosexuals, or define it within a secular worldview and force it on those who are religious and believe otherwise. Government has NO business whatsoever defining marriage. Because the government has been meddling, we have churches that are getting sued and losing certain rights for politely refusing to hold homosexual unions, and gays are getting frustrated that people are forcing their views on them. Civil unions are within governmental jurisdiction, yes, but not marriage.

I would explain more, but a friend of mine worded it perfectly:

You could also ask when it became Constitutional to include gay couples in the concept of marriage, given that nobody even hazarded the concept until fairly recently. And given that gays can't bear children, or statistically nurture them as well as a married man and woman (to be fair, the same is true of divorced couples, or unmarried couples...), why should they get special advantages over say, two brothers living together who just want tax benefits? Why should we subsidize non-child-producing sex? Not to mention a lifestyle that knocks twice as many years off your life as smoking, which the government constantly runs ads on TV against and taxes to death.

I am willing to tolerate civil unions, as long as you have to be together for at least a year for benefits to kick in, and as long as civil unions are equally available to any grouping of two or more adults, regardless of physical relationship status. But don't mess with marriage. There are many good reasons why it is one man and one woman and not two men, one man and many women (where is the outrage over banning polygamy?), etc., and the federal government shouldn't be deciding this anyway, since anything that impacts religion is outside of their jurisdiction and should be left to the states to decide.

In the end, true marriage equality is when the government stays away from the subject, and lets individuals handle it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

This was made in response to this new fad, where people make their icons or avatars a red equal sign to advocate for "marriage equality". As a Libertarian and a Catholic, my response is "Marriage is a religious institution that is between the individuals involved and the church or other organization they are a part of. Government has no right to define it, or to force it's view on marriage onto the populace." So yeah. That's my stance on it.

Also, I am not trying to define marriage in this stamp. Yes, I have my beliefs about marriage, but that isn't the point. My point is that government has no right or jurisdiction in trying to define marriage and forcing it onto everyone under the false pretense of "equality". Hopefully that all makes sense.

God bless, yaaaa'll

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments are closed for a reason. I do not have time for debate, nor am I interested. If you are angry that comments are closed, just know that you are the reason why

However, if there is anything here I should fix, improve, add, etc, feel free to note me!