Saturday, March 30, 2013

[Video] The Hypocrisy Of 'Marriage Equality' Advocates

It would appear that even proponents of so-called "same-sex marriage" admit that not all "marriages" are created equal...

FREE REPORT: Is Barack Obama Trying To Destroy The US Economy!

Input Your Primary Email Address Below And You'll Receive A Free Gift, Our Downloadable Report On The Cloward-Piven Strategy.

 

 

Privacy Policy: We respect your privacy and will not share your email address with ANYONE... PERIOD!

Phone Search Detective
Find out the owner of the cell phone or unlisted number that keeps calling you. Your search is confidential. [Search Now]

Mouse Over The Green Icon To The Left To Share This Story On Your Favorite Social Media Sites.

RELATED STORIES

4 comments:

  1. The point that the interviewer is missing is this: He calls marriage a "strictly religious institution." But this is not true. Marriage has at its base a civil nature. And, of course, in many cases, it also has a religous component. But these components can be separated.

    In some countries,a couple must engage in a government-sanctioned civil ceremony, and MAY engage in a religious ceremony; in others--such as the USA--one religious ceremony also fulfills the state civil requriemnt. Therein lies the confusion and the problem.

    If the USA followed the course in such countires as Monaco (and many other latin countries), to be married in the eyes of the state (taxes, inheritence rights, etc), the couple must go to a civil officer to be married. And they can stop there. If the couple also want religious sanction, they then go to their house of worship for a ceremony.

    No one is trying to force an unwilling church to marry same-sex couples. What same-sex couples demand is access to the bundle of civil rights that fall under the banner of marriage. Some couples will also seek the blessing of those religions that will offer it (the Episcopal Church comes to mind). But, no one is trying to force a church that is unwilling to perform a wedding for a same-sex couple.

    So, the interviewer's premise fails: Of course the government can say that you may become entitled to the tax and other benefits that come with the civil state of marriage with just one other person as compared with a group of other persons. But the government has to let that one person be the person of your choosing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The attempt to undermine marriage is equally pernicious whether aimed at civil marriage or Holy Matrimony. The idea of same sex marriage is a perversion and is evil and unless we are prepared to fight it the west is lost.

      http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles2/PragerHomosexuality.php#.T7FZOLE1bRo.facebook

      Read, learn. disseminate and send to your uneducated politicians and wolves in sheep's clothing such as Bill O'Reilly who is not a conservative.

      Delete
    2. The first reply states, "No one is trying to force an unwilling church to marry same-sex couples." That is false statement. There ARE people in the LBGT "community" trying to do that very thing. As usual, liberals lie - or are totally misinformed and adamant about their misinformation.

      Bob

      Delete
    3. Exactly. 96dd8... is naive if he/she thinks that if marriage between "anyone" becomes the law of the land, that churches will not be required to perform those marriages, regardless of moral conviction. The LBGT "activist" community will not stop until everyone is FORCED to accept their lifestyle. If we were of a libertarian persuasion, gays could marry as long as they respected the rights of a religion not to marry them. Unfortunately, I don't believe that will be the outcome. Tolerance is often only a word used by the intolerant.

      Delete

Posted By: Chris Carmouche