Saturday, June 27, 2015

Thoughts On The New State Of Marriage

Homosexual marriage is now Federal law.  Or rather the states no longer have the right to accept marriage as only between one man and one woman.

So what's the big deal?

As I've gotten older I realized the "Slippery Slope" argument is very valid.  I couldn't understand it when I was younger, but unfortunately age has proven it to be true.  In the 90's I remember the agument for Civil Unions for gay couples came up.  It was overwealmingly unpopular.  The argument at the tme was that would lead to Gay Marriage.

"No, that's not what we want", was the reply.

Yet, here we are.

"Polygamy will never be an issue, this is not about polygamy and it is an insult to compare the two."

I'm willing to bet money on what is next.  You see, once you change something that has been a religious anchor of Western culture it opens the door for other arguments.

The polygamists can now argue that their rights are being infringed because they cannot marry the two or three men or women they love.  The laws were changed to allow one man and one man to be "Married" or one woman and one woman to be "Married", why limit marriage to only "Two People"?

Don't you love?  Can't love win?  Why are you so Poligaphobic?

You are such a Hater! #H8tr

When the definition of an institution (or the word itself changes) then you can't morally say that it can't change for another group.  The new "Marriages" are not a commitment before God, they are a government contract.  I don't expect polygamy to be the end of this abomination.  Marriage between son and mother?  Marriage between father and daughter?  Marriage beween two brothers?  Why not?  Only those "Nutty Christians" who "Cling to their guns and religion" syand opposed.

The fact the Federal Government is now defining a "Marriage" is exactly why we on the right were so opposed to changing it.

The box is open, Pandora.  There is no closing it.

1 comment:

K T Cat said...

Good post. In trying to get my arms around this, from a higher altitude, it looks like the ultimate in saying there should be no rules. No rules about marriage, no rules about voting, no rules about the Constitution, no rules about what judges can and can't do, no rules about national borders, nothing at all. Give me what I want because I want it.