A Historic First

[buzuxi02]

Marriage is based on complimentarily not orientation. This complimentarity can produce Offspring and because of it, there are certain traditions attached to it. A father expects his daughter to marry and not be a "dishonest" woman. No such tradition exists in the homosexual culture. No mother is nagging that their gay child is living in sin and they should get married.

The problem is the gay lobby has invented the arguments AGAINST gay marriage and argue against this fabricated argument which they themselves invented. Sanctity of marriage whatever that means is neither a religious argument nor the secular argument. The gay lobby is simply looking for a money grab against taxpayers and pension funds. The interview of the priest proves that the media only bring attention to the shallow arguments against civil unions fabricated by the same opponents who are against them.

And since all the institutions are broke, gay marriage will be short lived as soon as the financial perks dry up.

 

[buzuxi02]

***** STAFF EDIT ***** An incentive afforded to married couples because originally women were stay at home moms to help with the expense of raising a child is now hijacked with people who have dual incomes. The marriage certificate also served as the insurance policy for the woman. The groom's name on the license upheld the paternity of any offspring during the coarse of that marriage. ***** STAFF EDIT *****

 

[Adaephon]

Complacency?

Yes.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Well SSA community shouldn't have to worry about custody because they can't give birth; no need for custody issues. They shouldn't be allowed to adopt. Inheritance isn't a problem. Put it in the will that you want to leave something to someone, done. Healthcare? Get a job with it and you have it. Beneficiary? Plenty of pensions like mine allow for gays to receive the benefits upon death of the other "partner." But in other places where it doesn't exist, just change the law.

Civil partnerships all the way. Give these folks all the perks they want, but don't call it marriage, because that is absurd.

What about custody, inheritance, healthcare, beneficiary, and numerous other things that get determined by legal marriage?

 

[rusmeister]

Somehow the point of the OP has been lost.

My intent was to point out that the uniformity of (mass) media reporting has shown a serious crack. You could always find an article like this in Touchstone, Salvo, or the Catholic World Report. You could never find it in USA Today. Until the other day. (AFAIK)

The campaign that has produced the attitude that many people now hold, especially young people, between public education and (even for those that escaped that education) the relentless media war to push this modern insanity, has "shown its slip" (a reference lost on younger people). I think this is a sign of latent sanity, of what we must return to, sooner or later, even if only after we have thoroughly wrecked our society - the family, the "traditional" family, the only thing that is truly family - father, mother and child.

 

[buzuxi02]

Rus,

I agree, perhaps we should start a permanent thread gathering all these articles on TAW.

The media will never print these articles nor will the opponents even argue against them, as these people simply do not have the intellectual capacity to do so. This strange animal is a money and power grab. Politicians get the gay vote while the gays get to put their hand in the cookie jar and siphon out more money from the taxpayer and their employers than is due them.

The word gamete is when two cells fuse during fertilization. Its also derived from the greek word for wedding and the slang greek word for intercourse. Likewise Matrimony comes from Mater which means 'mother'.

Marriage is based on complimentarity not on orientation, it is this complimentarity alone which can make complete the filial relationship through sexual generation. The two becomes one. Thus there is a male and female component and it is this bilateral filiation alone in which the completeness of child-rearing is found. And when one discards this philosophical argument then in reality you must by neccesity discard government marriage atogether. Civil unions at that point become a government intrusion into our lives and an excess layer of an unneeded bureaucracy.

Now we all know the gay lobby cannot compete philosophically on this issue. Andwe know some people have a hard time grasping the depths of philosophy. No problem, because everyone understands dollars and cents. Economically we can demonstrate that this is a money grab and will hurt everyone in the long run. The siphoning of money through perks by the creation of a brand new protected class to the detriment of every other living arrangement is a true civil rights violation and the theft of taxpayers.

 

[buzuxi02]

Well SSA community shouldn't have to worry about custody because they can't give birth; no need for custody issues. They shouldn't be allowed to adopt. Inheritance isn't a problem. Put it in the will that you want to leave something to someone, done. Healthcare? Get a job with it and you have it. Beneficiary? Plenty of pensions like mine allow for gays to receive the benefits upon death of the other "partner." But in other places where it doesn't exist, just change the law.

Civil partnerships all the way. Give these folks all the perks they want, but don't call it marriage, because that is absurd.

The financial perks homosexuals are lobbying for is exactly why they should be denied. Its simply to costly, a form of theft and a violation of equality. Here is another article the media will never print in their editorial pages: (this fellow may have read some of our posts here in TAW)


The Secular Case Against Gay Marriage - The Tech

 

[rusmeister]

See I will fight the your idea about adoption too. Well actually all of the ideas really.

Gene, the thing you need to realize if you ever approach the Church, is that it is going to ask you to admit thatyou are broken (just like the rest of us), not in a right relationship with God (like the rest of us), and that you'll have to struggle to conform to the image of Christ (like the rest of us). This is going to mean letting go of the idea that you are normal, that there is nothing wrong with you, and start admitting that the problems are within you more than in others (like us).

If you are tied to the idea that your understanding of your sexual identity is more important than your relationship to God, then you are only going to make yourself miserable (whether you approach the Church or not). Trusting God means letting go.

 

[Fotina]

What about custody, inheritance, healthcare, beneficiary, and numerous other things that get determined by legal marriage?

Doesn't legal contract/civil union include all the concerns or can include? Call it a new name but it is not marriage which is between one man and one woman, instituted by God in the beginning between the first man and woman.

 

[GenetoJean]

Gene, the thing you need to realize if you ever approach the Church, is that it is going to ask you to admit thatyou are broken (just like the rest of us), not in a right relationship with God (like the rest of us), and that you'll have to struggle to conform to the image of Christ (like the rest of us). This is going to mean letting go of the idea that you are normal, that there is nothing wrong with you, and start admitting that the problems are within you more than in others (like us).

If you are tied to the idea that your understanding of your sexual identity is more important than your relationship to God, then you are only going to make yourself miserable (whether you approach the Church or not). Trusting God means letting go.

I understand that. I wouldnt expect anything less. I am not asking your church to change. I am talking about in the legal realm. I dont even expect yall to stop fighting against SSM in the legal realm. I would like it if yall would but dont expect it. Everyone has a right to fight for whatever they think is the correct thing in the legal realm.

First someone would have to convince me that I dont have a relationship with God. I also know several people in the LGBT community that arent miserable. A big issue is when people tell me that I know in my heart I am wrong. I do not have any doubts in my heart, so as long as people tell me I do then I cant believe other things they say.

 

[Kristos]

Somehow the point of the OP has been lost.

My intent was to point out that the uniformity of (mass) media reporting has shown a serious crack. You could always find an article like this in Touchstone, Salvo, or the Catholic World Report. You could never find it in USA Today. Until the other day. (AFAIK)

The campaign that has produced the attitude that many people now hold, especially young people, between public education and (even for those that escaped that education) the relentless media war to push this modern insanity, has "shown its slip" (a reference lost on younger people). I think this is a sign of latent sanity, of what we must return to, sooner or later, even if only after we have thoroughly wrecked our society - the family, the "traditional" family, the only thing that is truly family - father, mother and child.

Agreed.

The media generally present the issue as "those for equality and love" and "those against".

 

[MKJ]

I am not sure that calling gays greedy and saying they want to steal from society is helpful, and it sure is not charitable or accurate.

We should generally assume that peoples motives are as honest as our own.

Gays who want the financial benefits of partnership are probably looking around them and seeing other childless couples who are benefiting in that way, and do not see how they are really any different. And for the most part, they are not different.

The fact is it is not all that easy for people to do really well as singles, because we have changed our economic model to one where two incomes are more and more a requirement, especially for those who have working class jobs. I have noticed increasingly in recent years people getting together with roommates or friends to get by, not in a sexual relationship but with long-term intentions - buying houses together for example.

So perhaps some of this is actually coming out of an increased need for people to make other kids of social arrangements to manage. There used to be a lot of people who did things like enter monastic life, which provided a lot of stability and cared for their members, but that is not really an option in most cases for single people today. And there was also a lot of poverty among the elderly or infirm that i do not think we want to accept.

But I think that to go off about how gays are trying to steal from the rest of us is not very kind and not very true.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Hey Meghan,

One of the few times I disagree with ya. The gay community is very entitlement-oriented, and make no mistake that they aren't just out for economic percs and taking care of children without parents, etc. Most of them know that civil partnerships could achieve all the financial and inheritance goals they seek. They want IT ALL. They want a life of sodomy to be equated with normal traditional marriage. I think you underestimate Satan's role in society and his power. Not everything is just plain good will and sincerity. Satan can use people. Look at how he used Peter when the Lord tells him, "get thee behind me, Satan." Satan uses our fallen nature and tempts us greatly. He desires the breakdown of the family. To reduce it to mere economics and warm feelings, I think, misses the point of the diabolical and the war between good and evil that we're all witnesses to in 2013 and beyond....

I am not sure that calling gays greedy and saying they want to steal from society is helpful, and it sure is not charitable or accurate.

We should generally assume that peoples motives are as honest as our own.

Gays who want the financial benefits of partnership are probably looking around them and seeing other childless couples who are benefiting in that way, and do not see how they are really any different. And for the most part, they are not different.

The fact is it is not all that easy for people to do really well as singles, because we have changed our economic model to one where two incomes are more and more a requirement, especially for those who have working class jobs. I have noticed increasingly in recent years people getting together with roommates or friends to get by, not in a sexual relationship but with long-term intentions - buying houses together for example.

So perhaps some of this is actually coming out of an increased need for people to make other kids of social arrangements to manage. There used to be a lot of people who did things like enter monastic life, which provided a lot of stability and cared for their members, but that is not really an option in most cases for single people today. And there was also a lot of poverty among the elderly or infirm that i do not think we want to accept.

But I think that to go off about how gays are trying to steal from the rest of us is not very kind and not very true.

 

[Fotina]

What about custody, inheritance, healthcare, beneficiary, and numerous other things that get determined by legal marriage?

Doesn't legal contract/civil union include all the concerns or can include? Call it a new name but it is not marriage which is between one man and one woman, instituted by God in the beginning between the first man and woman.

...staff edit...

Why must the First and most ancient institution of humankind retreat and submit to your demands?

 

[GenetoJean]

Hey Meghan,

One of the few times I disagree with ya. The gay community is very entitlement-oriented, and make no mistake that they aren't just out for economic percs and taking care of children without parents, etc. Most of them know that civil partnerships could achieve all the financial and inheritance goals they seek. They want IT ALL. They want a life of sodomy to be equated with normal traditional marriage. I think you underestimate Satan's role in society and his power. Not everything is just plain good will and sincerity. Satan can use people. Look at how he used Peter when the Lord tells him, "get thee behind me, Satan." Satan uses our fallen nature and tempts us greatly. He desires the breakdown of the family. To reduce it to mere economics and warm feelings, I think, misses the point of the diabolical and the war between good and evil that we're all witnesses to in 2013 and beyond....

Do you think I am an evil person lying to you or do you think I am misled?

 

[rusmeister]

Hi, M,
FWIW, I'm in a correspondence dialog with an "arch-enemy" - my best friend from childhood who is one of the leaders in the struggle for LGBT rights in San Francisco.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7734419/

So I ask for your prayers, too, as I strive to put forth the very best of our Tradition, and acknowledge all that is good in what he has come to.

Because of that, I cannot accept simplistic "good guys vs bad guys" formulas, and mainly try to get across to him the Truth of our Faith, that he is tired of hearing and has never heard. So I agree with you that they have an idealistic side and are NOT entirely focused on bebnefits, financial gain, etc. From their perspective, they see it as an issue of equality and discrimination, and I have to get an entirely different paradigm across, with the caveat that he may cut off communications at any time. I have to convince him that we are NOT unreasonable bigoted !@#$%^&.

 

[MKJ]

Hey Meghan,

One of the few times I disagree with ya. The gay community is very entitlement-oriented, and make no mistake that they aren't just out for economic percs and taking care of children without parents, etc. Most of them know that civil partnerships could achieve all the financial and inheritance goals they seek. They want IT ALL. They want a life of sodomy to be equated with normal traditional marriage. I think you underestimate Satan's role in society and his power. Not everything is just plain good will and sincerity. Satan can use people. Look at how he used Peter when the Lord tells him, "get thee behind me, Satan." Satan uses our fallen nature and tempts us greatly. He desires the breakdown of the family. To reduce it to mere economics and warm feelings, I think, misses the point of the diabolical and the war between good and evil that we're all witnesses to in 2013 and beyond....

But why shouldn't they want those things - there are many people out there, married with no kids, no intention of having them, two careers, and they are eligible, no questions asked, for all these financial benefits. And people do not look askance at them, they are generally happy and positive that they are getting married, and consider those benefits their due, and no one thinks they are greedy.

If a married couple who has no desire for a family can consider those things their due under the law and people support that, why would a homosexual feel differently. You might get a different view from some conservative religious sources with a more holistic view of marriage, but the truth is very few people have actually been exposed to that perspective - it is almost totally absent in popular culture.

I dont think I underestimate what Satan is trying to do - he uses even our good intentions when he can. But I do not think that means that homosexuals are looking to defraud society due to greed. They just do not see how their position is different from others that are widely supported.

 

[MKJ]

Hi, M,
FWIW, I'm in a correspondence dialog with an "arch-enemy" - my best friend from childhood who is one of the leaders in the struggle for LGBT rights in San Francisco.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7734419/

So I ask for your prayers, too, as I strive to put forth the very best of our Tradition, and acknowledge all that is good in what he has come to.

Because of that, I cannot accept simplistic "good guys vs bad guys" formulas, and mainly try to get across to him the Truth of our Faith, that he is tired of hearing and has never heard. So I agree with you that they have an idealistic side and are NOT entirely focused on bebnefits, financial gain, etc. From their perspective, they see it as an issue of equality and discrimination, and I have to get an entirely different paradigm across, with the caveat that he may cut off communications at any time. I have to convince him that we are NOT unreasonable bigoted !@#$%^&.

Ive never had the impression you think of people as in some sort of conspiracy to do evil to society!

In general, I think very few people are out to do evil or perpetrate injustice.

It is very hard I think, to communicate the ideas you are talking about, because the understanding of marriage and sexuality is really fundamentally different. People have almost no experience to draw on to start to make a connection and build a picture of what is being communicated. And in the meantime they have been exposed to such silly and often nasty presentations of a Christian worldview, that they tend to interpret whatever is said in that light.

I hope you have good luck at least in forging some bonds of charity, which is probably the most important thing.

 

[buzuxi02]

MKJ,

Whether they are looking intensionally or not to defraud society is irrelevant because that's precisely what there doing. There not lobbying for all people to be able to nominate a beneficiary for social security survivor benefits. There lobbying for a special class just for themselves. That's not equality that's theft. Most single people don't even want such a system and know SS is running out.

Matrimony does not afford people costly perks because they found 'love' . The word matrimony means motherhood. Affording rights based on whose in love is discriminatory and a form of inequality to those that have not found love. It is wholly unnecessary and meaningless.

 

[buzuxi02]

It is very hard I think, to communicate the ideas you are talking about, because the understanding of marriage and sexuality is really fundamentally different. People have almost no experience to draw on to start to make a connection and build a picture of what is being communicated. And in the meantime they have been exposed to such silly and often nasty presentations of a Christian worldview, that they tend to interpret whatever is said in that light.

MKJ,

I'm not following your post. Everyone knows what marriage is for. As I've written in a previous thread the word gamos is greek for wedding its also a greek slang word for sexual intercourse. Its also where the word gamete is derived from and from their other words such as monogamy.

When a friend of mine got his girlfriend pregnant a few years ago he pressured her to get an abortion. She refused and told him wheher he liked it or not, that they should get married. Sure enough they got married so fast even the bride's father didnt realize she was already pregnant.

Last year my cousin intentionally got pregnant even though she was single, as her biological clock was ticking. She told her bf that either they will get married or he can buzz off. So they had a hurry up civil union.

After years of living together with his gf another friend of mine finally get married only because his live in gf got pregnant and she demanded it.

Everyone knows marriage is for procreation as the above examples amply demonstrate. Its not derived from law, its derived from nature. By nature women want the stability of a commitment, not because of love but because the need for the protection and well being of her offspring.

Homosexuals who lobby for gay unions are GREEDY. Plain and simple. They want to get paid because their in love! how disgusting.