Comments on: Kurtz on same sex marriage

By: nyyo

nyyo — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 01:51:29 +0000

Love between two unrelated adult human beings let’s say “yes”. Incest and bestiality let’s say “no”

Simple.

By: JuliB

JuliB — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:02:48 +0000

Also – marriage predates our government – who is the judge (or any on the left) to redefine it? Prop 8 was brilliant in that it was affirming something, and was not ‘against’ anything in its wording.

By: JuliB

JuliB — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:01:11 +0000

I know this isn’t a religious blog, but this is what happens when we as a society turn our back on God. I could be wrong, but I’ve always believed that monogamy was more a Christian concept than anything else. Without a common moral background / perspective, there’s no real reason to insist on one man-one woman.

I was an atheist for 25 years, and believed even then that the judeo-christian beliefs in society to be ever so important due to the civilization that developed around such values. Yes, even while these ideals were poorly practiced.

If homosexuals can marry, than I can see no justification why marriage must be restricted to just 2 people, or why brother and sister cannot marry. After all, people control their own fertility now, so birth defects and the like are minimal.

As for the judge divining that people voted a certain way out of baseless moral judgment, I am beyond appalled. There’s no test for why people vote the way they do, whether it for good or ‘bad’ reason. The judge cannot read minds.

By: nyyo

nyyo — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 21:04:30 +0000

There is nothing irresponsible about the idea of same sex parents. People who are ethical who love, teach, and care for children are being responsible. It’s more like a deconstructing of a social engineering that says it can only be one way. I’m in a heterosexual marriage, but if another couple that is same sex and are hopefully as I’ve generally described then it’s none of my or any ones business, it’s none of your business.

By: Richard Romano

Richard Romano — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 17:53:52 +0000

nyyo:

The raising of chlidren and their socialization into resposible adults IS our business, since we’ll all have to live with the cosequences of this social engineering experiment.

By: nyyo

nyyo — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 15:06:49 +0000

It’s about love, legal union, personal responsibility, and no one else’s business. This is “one” that Conservatives and Progressive should agree on.

By: expat

expat — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 11:08:35 +0000

Fenelon,
I hear this thing about government getting out of the marriage business all over the place. What does this do to all the default government policies on income, taxes, property, parental rights and responsibilities, etc.? Would this mean that every married couple would have to see a lawyer every month to update their legal status? Even with all today’s exceptions, government recognition of marriage with its responsibilties does give a certain social stability. Why should heterosexual couples who want a traditional family be forced to join a church? The argument that homosexuals can also be parents doesn’t work with me because there is no way that their parenthood resulted from sex with their partner. Attributing the institution of marriage solely to religious belief is an attempt to divert attention from its wider social functions.

By: FenelonSpoke

FenelonSpoke — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 09:42:17 +0000

Richard,

Count me as one of the people who supported homosexual marriage until I saw the reprehensible behavior by some of the homosexual activists in California. Now I think the government should get out of the marriage business entirely.

By: Mike Mc.

Mike Mc. — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 03:03:53 +0000

If it were not yet another sign of late-stage societal decadence and decline, the concept of gay marriage would be a laugh since there is no such thing as gay marriage.

Forget that gays are not gay. Homosexual marriage does not exist since the adjective contradicts the noun. It’s like saying rectangular circle.

Marriage is the term for the man-woman-children-family thing. Take away any of those elements and what you have is not a marriage. The day they say there is such a thing as gay marriage is the exact day when the man-woman-child-family thing gets a new name…and the exact day when gays will say they want to be that thing too.

But it will never be that thing, and the crying will never stop either.

At least until enough good people stand up and call ‘Enough!’

By: anna

anna — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 23:49:34 +0000

expat, you read my mind, I was totally trying to post that same article earlier!! (except firefox crashed and I gave up)