For what it's worth category..........
Much is being said about same-sex marriage amid charges of denying a group of citizens the ability to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…
The crux of the problem with the issue of same-sex marriage is calling it “marriage”. Those of the homosexual/lesbian persuasion and supporters conclude coupling two men or two women mirrors heterosexual marriage without distinction. It clearly does not nor does so-called “gay coupling” meet the tests of “marriage” as known for thousands of years.
The court has also bought into the idea that there is no history behind marriage, it’s purpose, or impact on society. Proponents of same-sex unions search for any and every slice of constitutional language, legal precedent, or any text whatever that will support a position demonstrating a denial of personal freedom or equal protection.
Traditional marriage, among other benefits, draws a man and woman together for the primary moral purpose of procreation. Herein defines the term “marriage” and clearly differentiates between same sex couples which has nothing whatever to do with restricting personal freedom or denying equal protection.
If States want to pass laws giving same sex couples the ability to contract with one another, benefits as same sex couples, create a social term, that’s up to “we the people” of individual States. But there is nothing in the coupling of two men or two women that has any relationship to the traditional term of “marriage” nor it’s purpose.
When the question is asked: Are you married? The answer “yes” means the joining of a man and a woman. The term “marriage” is finite, it can have only one meaning.
When this issue reaches the US Supreme Court, the court will render a decision that coupling two men or two women is not, never has, nor never will, be “marriage”.
Harry Riley
.
Replies