Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Curious

March 29, 2013

As I contemplate the Supreme Court hearing the case against the people of California who voted against same-sex marriage, first I ask, "Why is this case even being heard here?" I would think that th......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(77)

Tedeaux

Mar-29-13 2:51 AM

Why is the government involved in the institution of marriage in the first place? God defined marriage long before there was a United States. Marriage falls under the realm of the church. The government has no business in this conversation.

10 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Mar-29-13 5:31 AM

So under Mr. Weigle's theory of Government, if the people in a state vote to enslave a group of people simply based upon their race, the Federal Government/SCOTUS should have no say in the matter. Sorry pal, that's not the way it works.

I agree Tedeaux, the Government has no business being in the marriage conversation. They should be in the business of acknowledging a contract between 2 adult individuals who agree to share a common property. It should matter not whether those 2 individuals are 2 males, 2 females, or a male/female. It's all the same. Let the each church take care of the business of marriage.

8 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CarlHiller

Mar-29-13 6:28 AM

gavinf56 - While I can agree to a point, we are not discussing "race" in the case of homosexual marriage. I understand the moral/religious stance against the gay lifestyle but for any to stand in judgment of those who choose to live this way is presumptuous and arrogant. A marriage of two men or two women has no impact on my marriage to my wife, my love of my child or my life as a whole. I don't care whether being gay is a sin, that's not for me to decide and I don't presume to usurp God's power to pass judgment. Do I support legalization of gay marriage from the standpoint of government policy? Yes, I do. Do I support government forcing private religious organizations to conduct such ceremonies? No, I do not. Do I support efforts to indoctrinate my children that those lifestyles are right or normal? No, I don't. My wife and I teach our child according to our own morality and a big part of that is “live and let live”. No government has the right to contradict that.

16 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CarlHiller

Mar-29-13 6:33 AM

We don't have to like what others choose to do, but not liking is different than being harmed by their choices, or by being forced to directly associate with it. If our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are not directly harmed by the actions of another, they don't and should not need our permission. The pendulum has swung all too far to the government when it comes to respecting individual rights versus giving more power to government. Opposing the right of two people to choose whom they will marry is not getting us anywhere productive and actively creates political enemies where otherwise our interests, individual liberty and freedom with minimal government interference, might otherwise align.

15 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JerryfromRI

Mar-29-13 6:58 AM

I fully support the right of a gay person to love and marry whomever they want to. If it's decided that the Constitution, as written today, does not support that right, then I say we change the Constitution.

6 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Mar-29-13 7:01 AM

Marriage, biblically and traditionally, is one man and one woman, and I believe it should remain that way. If, as is suggested by many, it's about gay couples having the same advantages and "rights" as traditional married couple, I don't have a problem with giving those rights. My problem with it is calling it a "marriage". Call it a civil union, a partnership, or whatever you want to call it and I don't have a problem with it. Marriage is and always will be one man and one woman as far as I'm concerned. In my eyes we are not creating a 'new' law banning gay marriage. We are simply voicing our objection to creating a 'new' law legalizing gay marriage.

10 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Mar-29-13 7:03 AM

I have no reservation giving the 'rights' to gay couples that they want in their call to be 'married'. I fully understand and agree they ought to be given rights of survivorship, the right to make health decisions for their partner, the right to be covered under insurance and be left with social security and pension benefits upon the death of their partner, and all the other benefits that a traditional married couple enjoys. I get all of that. But, given the opposition to the term 'gay marriage' (and it's not just the Christian faith that condemns homosexuality, and there are people of no faith who oppose Gay Marriage as well), why can't we have a civil union that gives all those rights? Why does the LGBT community insist it be called a marriage? If's it's truly a matter of rights and a Civil Union (or whatever anyone want to call it other than marriage) would give all of those same rights and benefits of traditional, why is that not acceptable?

7 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Mar-29-13 7:03 AM

Or is it now really a matter of principle? The road to equal rights, in my opinion, would be easier and a lot less contentious if you worked around the term 'Marriage'.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Mar-29-13 7:07 AM

"Our society has accepted two huge lies. The first being that if you disagree with someone's lifestyle you must fear and hate them. The second being that if you love someone you have to agree with everything you believe or do. Both are nonsense. You don't have to compromise convictions to be compassionate."

-Rick Warren.

9 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

USABorn

Mar-29-13 7:09 AM

I am a conservative republican in every area EXCEPT gay marriage. So many people claim gays would make a mockery of marriage.....that is ludicrous. With a divorce rate of 60-70%, I would say we heterosexuals have made a mockery of marriage.

I know a number of gay couples who have been together for many years, are great friends and neighbors, and have raised or are raising great children. The single gays I know are not permiscuous. Don't compare all gays to the crazies in San Francisco! In fact, don't JUDGE gays at all. That is GOD'S job, not yours. I see no reason why they shouldn't have the same opportunity to be happy in their relationships.

9 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Mar-29-13 7:10 AM

That should read:

*agree with everything THEY believe or do

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rick424

Mar-29-13 7:11 AM

I fully support gay marriage always have, even when I was a republican. The government sets the rules for marriage at tax time not the church. As time changes and the old die off this will be seen as one of those silly things in US history. Face guys, it is over gay marriage is here now. It is even political.

4 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Mar-29-13 7:58 AM

First God did not define marriage. Society did, the concept of marriage is older than Christianity. Government's involvement legitimizes 'marriage' as define by society. The church is ceremony, government makes it real/legal.

4 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Tedeaux

Mar-29-13 8:12 AM

I agree 100%that with Mike's position on same sex marriage. I have no problem with gay couples enjoying all of the legal benefits of marriage through civil unions, I object to the Federal Government trying to force the issue of re-defining the term "marriage" to accomodate a small but very vocal group of

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Mar-29-13 8:15 AM

"Well, let's look at this another way. If the voters of PA voted for John Smith and he won. Why can't the looser go to a sympathetic judge with a different ideology and find a "problem" with the vote and proclaim the vote "null and void"." - Gregory Weigle

*

Because the loser(s), instead, decided to BLOCK as many votes (as they could manage), during the NEXT election.

0 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Tedeaux

Mar-29-13 8:16 AM

Maybe you could solve a mystery for me Chuck, do you have to be gay to be a Democrat or do you have to be a democrat to be gay?

7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Mar-29-13 8:18 AM

"Why is the government involved in the institution of marriage in the first place? God defined marriage long before there was a United States. Marriage falls under the realm of the church." - Tedeaux

*

That's odd. I never heard of any churches deciding how to distribute assets, during any divorces.

0 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Mar-29-13 8:25 AM

"A marriage of two men or two women has no impact on my marriage to my wife, my love of my child or my life as a whole." - CarlHiller

*

Agreed.

There have (already) BEEN marriages, between same-sex adults, yet...there have been NO EXAMPLES of (whatever) "destruction" those marriages have wrought upon society, in general.

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Mar-29-13 8:34 AM

"Marriage, biblically and traditionally, is one man and one woman, and I believe it should remain that way." - mikekerstetter

*

Fortunately, tradition has nothing-to-do with our system of justice/laws. Tradition is merely one more excuse for maintaining the status quo...and, what (too) many people rely-upon to justify their laziness (of thought & action).

0 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Mar-29-13 8:38 AM

"Why does the LGBT community insist it be called a marriage?" - mikekerstetter

*

Because they're as MUCH "owners" of the term "marriage", as anyone ELSE??

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Mar-29-13 8:42 AM

"The road to equal rights, in my opinion, would be easier and a lot less contentious if you worked around the term 'Marriage'." - mikekerstetter

*

You mean...more "convenient"...for you...correct?

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Mar-29-13 8:51 AM

"Our society has accepted two huge lies. The first being that if you disagree with someone's lifestyle you must fear and hate them. The second being that if you love someone you have to agree with everything you believe or do. Both are nonsense. You don't have to compromise convictions to be compassionate." - Rick Warren." - mikekerstetter

*

Fortunately...and, for obvious reasons...Rick Warren will never be a Judge.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

philunderwood

Mar-29-13 8:57 AM

There are two facets concerning marriage, one is legal and the other is moral. Government must determine the legal issues and the church and individuals must determine the moral issues for themselves. The ceremony that makes marriage a legal contract can be performed civilly or by a church, but a permit must be gotten first.

Same sex unions should have the same legal provisions as any other union. As people move from one state to another, whether temporally or permanently, the same legal aspects of their unions should apply. That’s the only reason the federal government should be involved in this.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Mar-29-13 8:58 AM

"I agree 100%that with Mike's position on same sex marriage. I have no problem with gay couples enjoying all of the legal benefits of marriage through civil unions, I object to the Federal Government trying to force the issue of re-defining the term "marriage" to accomodate a small but very vocal group of" - Tedeaux

*

No one's re-defining the term "marriage"...and, no one OWNS the term "marriage".

There IS no problem.

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Mar-29-13 9:05 AM

"Maybe you could solve a mystery for me Chuck, do you have to be gay to be a Democrat or do you have to be a democrat to be gay?" - Tedeaux

*

The only mystery is why "conservatives" are obsessed with such things.

I'm guessing...If you had a Life, of your OWN...you wouldn't have so much "extra" time to worry about what everyone-else is doing with theirs.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 77 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web