Tag Archive: Gay Marriage


Inevitability.

It’s time to get government out of marriage. Let people call what they want a marriage, and let government only declare family units.

Advertisements

I believe that it further highlights the need to get government out of the business of defining marriage. As Chief Justice Roberts points out, the very same logic that justifies this ruling pretty much justifies much more. I don’t see any reason why it shouldn’t. Instead, let people declare “family units”, of whatever arrangement they think is best – siblings living together would be just as eligible as married couples – and marriage would be a term that people can apply whatever definition to they wish.

Justice Scalia, meanwhile, is angry at the seizure of power that the Judicial branch has taken.

Because he doesn’t support gay marriage.

Hmm. So mainstream Catholics aren’t in line with the Catholic church?

Even if you serve them, you’ll still end up sued.

The left has reinterpreted (as always) “tolerance” to mean punishing those who they don’t like.

Interesting. As Instapundit points out, if they decide that marriage is a constitutional right between two people, then all the laws against incest are also unconstitutional.

I’ve said this before: I think the root of the problem is that we’ve overloaded “marriage” to mean two different things, one being a civil recognition of a component of a family unit, the other being religious recognition of a condition between people self-imposed by a set of vows. I believe the only clean way out of all of this mess is to separate those two functions. Let churches recognize “marriage” according to whatever conventions they believe in, and have government recognize declared family units, regardless of the arrangement of the unit (and it doesn’t have to be “marriage” to be a family unit, either).

As was obvious all along, and much of the gay community voted for him because they thought he was lying. That’s the kind of character they wanted to see in their president.

Of course it is, we’ve been seeing the trends for years.

You don’t have to read too many feminist blog post comment threads to realize that the same group that sees gay marriage and feminism as the most important issues of the day despise all traditional values and everyone and everything associated with them, simply because there are a few details they don’t like, and color everything through the lens of those few details.

Manufacturing Outrage

Gay couple walks into a location and begins making out in front of everyone, then goes to the media as soon as they’re kicked out.

It’s basically another attempt to shut down anyone who’s not explicitly and vocally in favor of gay marriage.

Gay divorce.

I’m amused.

Calls for Eric Holder’s impeachment following his “don’t enforce it” line to other Attorney Generals.

Liberal Activist Judges:

Can’t even tell the difference between the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

But of course, most Liberal policies are based on feelings anyway.

“Having to violate your religious beliefs is a price of citizenship”

That seems pretty far from the founding fathers’ take on religious liberty. But apparently I’m one of those extremists the Obama Defense Department is warning about.

LGBT Fascism

A Bed-and-Breakfast in Vermont expressed their opinion on gay marriage, and was promptly fined $30,000.

Related, and my opinion on the issue.

A bakery owner faces up to a year in prison for refusing to bake a cake for a gay couple. Liberal Fascism: if you think the wrong thoughts and don’t agree to serve any customer who’s of an ever expanding list of groups that can bring lawsuits for discrimination against you, you’ll go to prison.

I’m perfectly fine with any and all service discrimination based on race, sex, height, whatever. If the service provider discriminates, boycott and expose them. The instant you force the person to do something against their will is the instant you expose yourself as Fascist.

Death threats to the first gay Muslim couple to marry.

Rose up again during the recent supreme court debate. And not from one of the conservative judges.

Why does our government even have a definition of marriage? Let people declare that they’re living in family units, regardless of whether some church or Vegas Elvis says it’s a marriage, or if it’s someone caring for a disabled relative.

Good.

Expressing an opinion apparently counts as discrimination now.

Meanwhile, the “tolerance” this goon displayed on camera has resulted in him losing his job.

A bill in California to allow children to have any number of parents. Why is it that the left spent so much time claiming that their justification for gay marriage wouldn’t lead to immediate bills for polygamy, right up to the point where they filed to allow polygamy? (Rhetorical, of course, I know the answer).

I’m mainly pointing out the absolutely predictable flip-flop here. For the record, I honestly think marriage should be a church definition and not defined by the government at all – but of course that doesn’t suit the percent of the population who insists that everyone should abide by their definition of the term.

Barack Obama’s Firsts

While the media celebrates Barack Obama becoming the first President to openly embrace gay marriage (putting his views finally in line with Dick Cheney’s, and flip-flopping once again his views on the subject), here’s a list of other historic firsts he’s presided over.

It’s also worth mentioning that the only thing this statement did is force Obama into a bit of honesty during the election: he was planning on making the endorsement after the election, but avoiding the issue during. Liar.