Obama says same-sex couples should be able to marry

[Ridge]

Well, why has it been necessary for hundreds of years? All those reasons.

So the government can get money out of you with a license.

[BPTactical]

So the government can get money out of you with a license.

No, that it is a legally recognized union between man and wife.
Not that gubberment intervention is needed for that though......

[Tinelement]

I already put my 2 cents in.

Is this gonna be the first closed thread of the new forum!?

Coffee
Popcorn

[Wulf202]

No, that it is a legally recognized union between man and wife.

Or if you live together for more than 6 months. With all the common law marriage laws it doesn't mean shit, no union, no ceremony or vows, just living under the same roof. Hell male and female room mates qualify quite often.

[Jumpstart]

So the government can get money out of you with a license.

First you paint it as a "religious notion" and now it's about the government taking your money. Men and women have been getting "married" across societies for thousands of years. There is a reason behind that fact.

[Ridge]

Men and women have been getting "married" across societies for thousands of years. There is a reason behind that fact.

And what is the reason? And why do two people that begrudgingly live together to support an illegitimate child have more right to it than two people who love each other?

[BPTactical]

And what is the reason? And why do two people that begrudgingly live together to support an illegitimate child have more right to it than two people who love each other?

Dr Phil wants to know........

[XC700116]

I am so very torn on this subject.
1- I am all for personal freedoms, if that is the life that one wishes then so be it. Just don't expect me to accept it as "normal" and don't you dare think you deserve anything exceptional or "protected class" status.
2-Marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman.
3-Adoption-Bullshit. It takes a man and a woman to make a child and it takes a man and a woman to raise a child. I sincerely feel that a child in a gay marriage is set up to fail. The additional stresses it places on a child must be tremendous.
We have seen historically that a large amount of children that commit serious crimes come from dysfunctional families. Seriously, how much more dysfunctional than wife and wife or husband and husband can you get?

What is the worst part is the clear indicator that this is a further degradation of the very fiber of our society, morals.
Without morals there is no right or wrong.

I think this is by design, one way to weaken a strong county and society is to destroy the basis of said society.
Destroy the traditional family, destroy the morals of society and you have a society that is very easily influenced and manipulated.
Perfect Marxist strategy.

Generally I agree with you in many aspects and used to hold the exact same views until my mother remarried a man who's oldest son, now my step brother, is gay. He's from a strong Catholic family, my step father's first wife died from cancer shortly after their youngest was born or they would probably still be together and I wouldn't even know them. He's not "out" they don't talk about it, he's not "LOOK AT ME I'm GAY and YOU have to accept it". He's just a early 40 something guy that happens to be attracted to other men. Who am I to say it's wrong? So to point #1 I 100% agree.

Point #2 is where I diverge, in the traditional sense marriage is between a man and woman, except early Mormons and many other cultures in this world believe/believed in plural marriage. Then the fact that marriage is born of religion, so I tend to think of it in the light of, it's part of certain religions and it shouldn't be applied in a general sense, or by the government in any form. IMO it equates to sharia law to a point in that it's a religious view enforced by government. I realize that is a pretty bold statement but it's merely meant to illustrate my point.

Point #3, I'm pretty much with you, but this part

Seriously, how much more dysfunctional than wife and wife or husband and husband can you get?

Well I can tell you I'd much rather have grown up in a home with two loving parents of the same sex than a mother that took care of me and an abusive drunk. Or what about the home where the parents are constantly fighting openly but "stay together for the kids" I actually know one of these couples that adopted their first child, how well adjusted do you think that kid is? The ONLY reason that a child in the home of a same sex marriage faces so much turmoil is the fact that society, and those that think they should be able to control other people's lives, put it there. The rest of the turmoil is in the hands of how the parents raise the child and their interactions in the home.

Do I really agree with gay couples adopting? No, but I have to say it's no worse than single mothers too young to have grown up before having a child, and then never really grow up and become a responsible parent, or couples that shouldn't be together that "stay together for the kids" yet fight like cats and dogs, or the home with an abusive parent.

As to degradation of morals, IMO, it's not a question of morality, it's a question of someone else's life as compared to YOUR morality. No government should be dictating personal morality as long as it does not interfere with another individual's choice, property, or freedom. If someone's sensibilities or feelings are somehow hurt by someone else's choices in life, well too fricken bad, get over it.

Marxism has no reference to promoting the degradation of morality, It for the most part revolves around economics and the fallacy that people will still work and achieve when there really is no incentive. So that really is a false idea, see the 10 pillars below. HOWEVER I do agree that the leftists in this country are picking and choosing strong 1 issue voters to pander to in order to get them to hand them the power, some it's gay rights, some it's abortion rights, some it's class warfare (this one boggles me to no end because half these idiots voting for them can't make the connection that they are voting for some of the biggest examples of what they are against or want confiscated in their name).

It seems sometimes that the average voter in this country can't apply logic or has the attention span of a 12 year old with A.D.D. after a double espresso. They can't see beyond the "I WANT" part of the thought process and never seem to connect the dots on the political ramifications of what they want and how to go about getting it. They just want someone to hand it to them and the leftists are perfectly willing to do so in order to gain or retain power. Should they ever get all of the power, it's all over and people will finally wake up, but it will be far too late.

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.

[Jumpstart]

And what is the reason? And why do two people that begrudgingly live together to support an illegitimate child have more right to it than two people who love each other?

Because they can create that child.

[Ridge]

Because they can create that child.

And then treat it like shit.