"Obviously civil marriage is
grounded in of age adult consent."
If you think marriage between a man and woman is not grounded, why would you think some subjective age of adult consent is grounded? NAMBLA certainly doesn't buy your argument. We seem to be able to redefine things however we wish. Let's just have some wishy-washy talk about equality and be done with these hangups about someone's rules?
As to Massachusetts and divorce rates, you're straining to make a connection that doesn't exist. Because MA allows homosexual marriage, that is the reason it has a low divorce rate? Sorry, there's no cause and effect there. What has been shown in MA is that even with the legalization of homosexual marriage, most homosexuals still choose not to marry. You can look that up.
According to most recent census data:
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/201…, MA does have a low divorce rate. But it also has one of the lowest marriage rates. The divorce rate is 40% of the marriage rate.
And what is it in that backward Bible belt state of South Carolina? The divorce rate is also almost exactly 40% of the marriage rate - the same as it is in "enlightened" MA. The connection you wish to make is a figment of your imagination.
So, heterosexuals have disgraced marriage with frequent and no-fault divorce. (That also includes Elizabeth Colbert Legare Busch....., raverjames.) Therefore, we should dumb marriage down further as to include male-male and female-female relationships. If it weren't for the compelling reasoning found on this board, I wouldn't know what to do.
As to the first poster, it's doubtful you'd recognize any libertarian. Why would a libertarian show up at a pom-pom rally that seeks further government endorsement of relationships?
Marriage equality? That's laughable. Who is looking out for the guy that wants to marry three women? or the one who wants to marry his daughter? or the poor guy that simply wants a relationship with his Great Dane?
Redman-Gress, as others before him, cloaks his argument in equality when it has nothing to do with equality. You can shack up with whomever you'd like. Why do you want a government endorsement?
With small limitations, any man or woman can marry the other. All are treated equally under the law as it now stands.
This is nothing more than an effort to redefine and dumb down marriage.
defining deviancy down
If you can't make a reasoned argument, try to anoint it with platitudes of equality.
The fertility rate in the U.S. is barely able to sustain any population growth at all. What population growth the U.S. has had the last two decades is mostly due to immigration, much of it illegal.
Yet, the ones who are incredulous at Kiawah developing the sand spit are also many of the same that favor amnesty for illegals.
I hope the sand spit remains undisturbed, but let's not blame things on a so-called population explosion in the U.S.
Ron Liberte writes:
"You folks like to talk a big game, but I wonder, if the Feds kicked down your door with a no-knock warrant, shot your dog and tried to take your guns, would you go out guns-a-blazin' like a true patriot?"
Hey Ron, good question. I wonder too if once the tens of millions of gun owners got whiff of that happening, how long would it be before the feds are drawing straws as to who gets to go confiscate the next gun?
Hey, Agents Larry, Curly, and Moe, you're up next. You get to go disarm that trailer park on the edge of the Okefenokee.
My guess is it wouldn't be too long before the feds are calling in sick.
You can take Sheriff Cannon's comments on two levels. One is that he understands the fundamental nature of the Bill of Rights and is going to be more keen in supporting it than the knee-jerk law du jour. Second, perhaps there's some self-preservation at work. If the anti-gun zealots passed gun confiscation laws, who wants to have the dirty job of doing the confiscation?
In that regard, those of you who think you blindly follow the law, perhaps you ought to volunteer to wear the badge if, and when, gun confiscation laws are enacted.
All Comments »
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2013,
Charleston City Paper