Home » Groups » Democracy for Utah » Blog » Defend Marriage Now!

Democracy for America group blog for Democracy for Utah

Defend Marriage Now!

Written by: Deborah S on Jul 8, 2008 6:46 PM EDT

I admit it.  I am not very liberal in my thinking.  In fact, I'm down-right conservative.  Just in case you are still reading this, I'll begin my thought.  I live in California, where we are currently debating whether or not to stick with the as-long-as-there-has-been-marriage definition of marriage or to change it.  While we are at it, we may as well debate whether or not polygamy is OK.  Or. . . incest.  Or . . . pick any combination that may sound bizarre to you today.  If we change the definition of marriage, we may as well say, "anything goes."  Because as sure as I live and breathe, that is exactly what will happen.  Eventually. 

Who are WE to change an institution that God set up?  OK, now I have REALLY lost you, haven't I?  I mentioned God.  Well, the fact of the matter is . . . conservatives are not the only ones who believe that God created this earth and everything on it.  Trust me -- it's true.  And, if God set up marriage (for the purpose of creating families), then who are we to change that?  Seriously. . . it is as simple as that for me.  

I realize that most of you reading (you ARE still reading, right) need a "better" reason than that because either you don't believe in God, your belief in God is only superficial, or because you think that if God were here today, he would want us to change the plan.  Really?  Do you really think that he made a mistake in the beginning when He set up the world?  Or, do you think it is more likely that WE are the ones who are making the mistake?

Forget the fact that study after study has proven that children who are raised with BOTH a mother and a father live happier, more productive lives.  Forget the fact that this change would mean a huge social experiment -- one I know I don't want to be responsible for.  Forget the fact that studies prove that fatherless homes produce more crime.

I will always come down on the side of truth.  And, the truth is . . . the institution of marriage is not ours to change.  God help us if this proposition fails.

Tags:
Location: San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

Discuss
 

Show: Expand All Reply

+0 Rating
4thptch_tinythumb

- Because as sure as I live and breathe, that is exactly what will happen. Eventually.

By Imn2Paine on Jul 8, 2008 9:44 PM EDT

Hyperbole.  Strike one.

 

 

-1 Rating
Yamaha_20mb1_20_20walnut_20console_tinythumb

- What Bullshit...

By Annilow on Jul 8, 2008 9:42 PM EDT

...on what authority do you know God invented marriage?  Jeez!!

+0 Rating
4thptch_tinythumb

- And, if God set up marriage (for the purpose of creating families), then who are we to change that? Seriously. . . it is as simple as that for me.

By Imn2Paine on Jul 8, 2008 9:46 PM EDT

Strike two.  Simple as that, and if you can't understand that...

 

BTW I believe in G@d as much as you, but people like you SEEM to assume so ideological high ground.  G@d knows why?  Oh well, the better-than-everyone-else folks where the same in the the time of Jesus - they knew what G@d created, and Jesus was an abomination.

Holy cow!

+0 Rating
4thptch_tinythumb

- , the truth is . . . the institution of marriage is not ours to change.

By Imn2Paine on Jul 8, 2008 9:56 PM EDT

Geez!  You do in your church whatever YOU think G@d made perfect.

Let other folks do what they will.

Go to Iran or whatever like christian country one like, but leave the good ol' USofA because WE are a nation of laws.

As far as the

polygamy- I vote no.

incest- I vote no.

any combination that may sound bizarre to you today- I vote no.

Seriously simple post, Deborah S.  Not seriously.

+0 Rating
Default_user

- A Country of Laws

By Deborah S on Jul 10, 2008 1:59 PM EDT

Yes, ours IS a country of laws.  Let's be sure the right ones are adopted!

Following is an excerpt from an essay I read, written by William T. Garner (retired Superior Court Judge, Long Beach, CA).

"Many personal freedoms, including the free exercise of religion, may well be diminished or lost if the amendment is not adopted.  Although such free exercise is provided in both the U.S. and California Constitutions, because same-sex marriage has now been found to be a constitutional right, it is reasonable to assume that there are some judges who will decide that the marriage right must prevail over the religious one.

  • In Boston, the Catholic Charities recently closed down its adoption program because the state of Massachusetts insisted that every adoption agency must allow same-sex couples to adopt.  

  • Thereafter, an affiliated agency in San Francisco did the same. 

  • A Methodist group in New Jersey lost part of its tax-exempt status because it refused to allow two lesbian couples to use its facility for a civil union ceremony. 

In Albuquerque, a wedding photographer was ordered by the state's Human Rights Commission to pay $6,637 to the attorney for a gay couple because she declined to photograph the couple's commitment ceremony.  She had explained to them that because of her religious beliefs she photographed only traditional marriages."

+0 Rating
Charlie_in_vermont_tinythumb

- What about thoses who can't have kids?

By Charles Chamberlain on Jul 9, 2008 1:25 AM EDT

If God created marriage "for the purpose of making families" then why does the church let sterile people marry?  They can't have kids.

What about people who marry in their 50's or later? The church allows that and they can't have babies.

I think love is love is love is love... and God intended for those who are in love to be family... I fully support marriage equality.

 

+0 Rating
Default_user

- My bad

By Deborah S on Jul 9, 2008 12:14 PM EDT

Well, is it obvious that this was the first time I posted on a blog?  I guess I need to apologize to some of you folks out there.  I was sarcastic and a did come across as holier-than-thou in an effort to write something that was interesting to read.  I let my strong feelings about this issue get in the way of presenting my ideas in a respectful way.  I am sorry.

My views haven't changed.  I still believe that the institution of marriage between one man and one woman is the best plan for civilization.  Men and women are different for a reason -- to come together and create families.  A committed marriage union, with both a mother and a father, is good for children.  As you already know, I don't need any further proof (because of my personal religious beliefs, which I hope you'll allow me), but there certainly is plenty of proof out there that this arrangement is better for children than any other combination (divorce, single parent families, gay unions).

Where same-sex marriage has been legalized, it decreases the total number of marriages while increasing illegitimacy.  Nine European nations have had same-sex marriage since the early 90s -- and just 2 percent of same-sex couples in these countries ever bother to marry, while there has been a 46 percent increase in out-of-wedlock births.

That's just one example.

I think it's a wonderful thing that so many people are becoming active in learning about this issue.  And, everyone has their own reasons for thinking the way they do.  Hopefully, after reading and thinking more on the subject, people who haven't yet decided can find all of our thoughts and come to their own conclusions.

Add your comment

(to reply directly to a comment, click the reply icon for that comment)

You must be logged in to post comments

If you already have an account, login below, otherwise signup now




(Forgot password?)


Yes, Remember Me

star My DFA
star Members
star Groups
star Events
star Candidates

Countdown to Victory

DFA Wireless

Night School DVDs

Blog for America

Recommended Blog Posts

Recent Blog Posts

The Watercooler