I am torn, at least partially, on today’s ruling(s) from the SCOTUS as they relate to the same-sex “marriage” debate. I am torn in the sense that, while I do agree that the Defense Of Marriage Act is un-constitutional, I don’t necessarily agree with the reason it was struck down (I’ll get to that later). Furthermore, I am also partially torn in the sense that I am a big proponent of clearly-defined terms not being re-defined and given new meanings simply for the sake of changes in the willingness of society to accept change.
I am more libertarian (not liberal) minded on most social issues and have no problems with people who are of the opposite sex and want to make a lifetime commitment to each-other. But I draw the line at changing the meaning of things just because you want inclusion in something that another group has.
The simple truth about marriage, something that many proponents of same-sex “marriage” refuse to understand, is that marriage is and has always been an institution that is between a man and a woman. While it is true that over the past few centuries the reasons that couples enter into marriage arraignments with each other may have changed, starting off as primarily financial arraignments centuries ago to now being about love, commitment & family; what has not changed is the people involved, a husband & a wife — or more specifically one man & one women.
Changing the definition of marriage is like changing the definition of water, it just can’t be done. Just as water is the combination of two hydrogen molecules & one oxygen molecule, marriage is the combination of one man and one woman. Furthermore the argument that “people should be allowed to marry whomever they please,” is simply not a valid excuse for redefining what marriage has traditionally been. If same-sex “marriage” is recognized, why not polygamous “marriage?,” or multiple participant “marriage?”
Many of the supporters of same-sex “marriage” (particularly those coming from a liberal / progressive viewpoint) would state that those are straw man arguments the fact is that redefining the definition of marriage to include government recognition same-sex couples as “married” based on the “people should be allowed to choose” argument, doesn’t just redefine marriage but completely undefines it.
That being said, I do believe that same-sex couples who choose to make a lifetime commitment to each other should have some of the protections afforded to married individuals, such as; financial rights, benefits, inheritance, health decisions… I just don’t believe that the institution of marriage should be trampled on to do so.
The other reason I am torn with today’s decision is that I find it truly saddening that the SCOTUS should have even been deciding on a case that involves the issue of marriage. Not only is marriage an issue that the Federal Government has no business being involved in, it shouldn’t even be an issue that government has any say in.
Marriage and people’s desires to make a lifetime commitment to each-other are private matters between those two individuals or those two-individuals and their faith/church or their interpretation of God.
As a small-government loving Conservative, I want the the government out of my life. If you need the government’s recognition of your union for it to be valid in your heart & mind, are you truly living in a free country?
Remy hits one out of the park again.
In the summer of 1965, the Watts section of Los Angeles erupted in six days of violent riots after a State Highway Patrol Officer pulled over and arrested a man for driving under the influence of alcohol. When it was all said and done, 34 people had been killed, 1,032 injured, and 3,952 arrested.
In typical liberal fashion, Democrats used the event to sponsor new government programs, to expand the welfare rolls. The radical left of the time viewed the riots as a prime opportunity for socialist revolution.
Shortly after the riots, Richard A. Cloward a Columbia University sociologist and fellow sociologist, wife and collaborator Francis Fox Piven exploited the riots to further their views of social equality and had begun circulating copies of an article they had written called “Mobilizing the Poor: How it could be done.” The article, slightly edited and re-titled appeared the following spring in the Nation. They believed that destruction could be used as an effective means of bringing about “change.”
Their plan was to expand and overload the welfare system to a point where it would completely be destroyed. Coward believed that the only way that poor people could advance in the world is when the rest of society feared them. They argued that a large enough financial crisis could force politicians (liberal Democrats) to enact legislation for the outright redistribution of income.
Sound like anything going on right now to you?
Obama is helping to fulfill the hopes and dreams of radical, commie loving hippes, and the whole country is more concerned with American Idol and other nonsense to realize it.
Cloward and Piven studied Saul Alinsky just like Hillary Clinton and President Obama.
Listen as Brannon and his guest James Simpson explain how Cloward and Piven inspired the creation of ACORN that Obama worked for as a community organizer.
This interview must be e-mailed all over the country. Americans must awaken and understand the goal of these radicals and what is to come if they succeed. Time is of the essence. Obama is not over his head as some have claimed; he knows exactly what he is doing.
Understand the Cloward-Piven Strategy, the rules of Saul Alinsky and their Cultural Marxist worldview and you will understand that what is occurring is not by mistake.
For more Click Here.
- @checkmatestate https://t.co/FicM4tlLU917 hours ago
- @TikTokInvestors Seriously. https://t.co/XAPKzNnOrV23 hours ago
- @realDonaldTrump Are all the troops home from everywhere? Has the misnamed Patriot Act been removed? Has @Snowden b… https://t.co/UzMZFZCTYs2 days ago
- Finally Friday! It's a cheap whiskey kinda night. https://t.co/AoJnqp3wWp3 days ago
- These Hollywood idiots, I swear. I wish CBS or FOX would have reached out to @Jorgensen4POTUS for her own town ha… https://t.co/hQyZ2jBX9J4 days ago
- The media & progressive hysteria over @icecube refusing to fall in line to their groupthink is a typical reaction o… https://t.co/bC33TlRbOO4 days ago
Error: API requests are being delayed for this account. New posts will not be retrieved.
There may be an issue with the Instagram access token that you are using. Your server might also be unable to connect to Instagram at this time.
Error: No posts found.
Make sure this account has posts available on instagram.com.
Error: admin-ajax.php test was not successful. Some features may not be available.
Please visit this page to troubleshoot.
I Stay Away
Alice in Chains
Jar of Flies
7 mins ago
Roll Me Up
12 mins ago
I'm A White Boy
A Working Man Can't Get Nowhere
14 mins ago
Rednecks, White Socks And Blue Ribbon Beer
Honky Tonk Man: Buck Sings Country Classics
17 mins ago
Jerry Jeff Walker
22 mins ago