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

Unfair punishment

April 3, 2013

Opponents of same sex marriage seem to be Christian Conservatives who wish to punish what they perceive as sin by denying the sinners the same benefits of marriage that heterosexuals receive....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(76)

richardson

Apr-03-13 12:55 AM

Phil: Good arguement.

9 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Tgrammiex4

Apr-03-13 2:36 AM

I have a question, and never heard it mentioned before.In the quest to make it legal for ANYONE to marry ANYONE and many mention "sinful relationships", does this also open the door to Brother/Sister, Father/daughter,etc. marriages? As ewwwwww as that is, it does happen.What determines what type of relationships are more "sinful" than others?

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DKMDKM

Apr-03-13 2:51 AM

Tgrammiex4, that is such a tired argument. Doesn't allowing anyone to get married open up such a slippery slope? Also, it's great way to see how you view homosexuals. You consider incest to be the same as two consenting adults entering a legal relationship? You have no grasp of reality. Leave your religion out of the government, leave your archaic views out of other peoples bedrooms and lives.

1 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DKMDKM

Apr-03-13 2:52 AM

Let's no forget about divorce. We shouldn't allow that either. Also, we need more episodes of "The Bachelor" so we can further strengthen the sanitary of marriage. The hypocrisy burns.

1 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Luey22

Apr-03-13 2:59 AM

Quite frankly, I do not care about this subject. It is not anyones business what goes on behind closed doors between consenting adults. The government will collect their paychecks regardless. We do not have to accept everything, but, tolerance would be nice for our short time here on Earth. Remember, we should not judge, but love! "Honestly, we're all just people. People needing people."-Francine (BINGO)

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Tgrammiex4

Apr-03-13 3:08 AM

DKMDKM, I don't think I voiced any opinion on anything, just posed a question.I can remember the day when Gay relationships were considered just as immoral as incestuous ones.Incest can happen with two consenting adults too. It was just a question I had never heard adressed.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

USABorn

Apr-03-13 4:33 AM

Tgrammiex4 - 2:36

"have a question, and never heard it mentioned before.In the quest to make it legal for ANYONE to marry ANYONE and many mention "sinful relationships", does this also open the door to Brother/Sister, Father/daughter,etc. marriages?"

No!!! What it leaves the door open for are idiots who refer to this kind of garbage instead of legitimate reasons they are against gay marriage!

We heterosexuals have done a supurb job on marriage, haven't we? With a 60-70% divorce rate? Of the gay couples I have known in my lifetime, not one of them has left the "union" except for death of a partner. Unfortunately, I can't say that about married friends.

As I have said before, let gays "MARRY" and be happy. God will see them later. So quit JUDGING and MYOB, cause "it ain't your job."

4 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Apr-03-13 5:27 AM

Very good letter Phil. Spot on as usual.

9 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Tgrammiex4

Apr-03-13 5:32 AM

USABorn, Again, I don't believe I stated MY opinion, just posed a question.FYI, i personally have no opinion on this as it doesn't effect me one way or the other. I have had a few friends/co=workers over the years who were gay, never liked or disliked any of them based on what thier personal choices were.You judging me and my presumed opinions is no better than what you are accusing me of.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eriklatranyi

Apr-03-13 5:53 AM

There is nothing stopping homosexual couples from entering into a union.

Society has recognized marriage as something for procreation and politicians decided to encourage that via the tax code.

But that still does not prohibit two men from entering into a union with each other.

There are no laws barring gay couples from uniting.

Are those unions recognized in the same way as marriage by our tax code?

No.

It is not the same as marriage. It is different.

There is nothing stopping our politicians from including civil unions into the law.

I would rather see marriage eliminated from the law as it is not the purview of gov't.

But redefining a term, marriage, to include homosexual couples is a mistake.

Homosexuals are incredibly creative and can design their own term for their unions that we will all recognize and tolerate.

But forcing people to accept and embrace such things with the force of gov't, be redefining the word marriage, is plain wrong.

9 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Apr-03-13 6:17 AM

does this also open the door to Brother/Sister, Father/daughter,etc. marriages?

Obviously not imo. That is another 'animal' altogether and it isn't about sin it's about it just being sick. Yeah Yeah, I know there's people saying to themselves "well that's what homosexuality is" we'll agree to disagree.

I don't see how someone can look at a sibling or their own child and 'love them' like that. It's called incest for a reason.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Apr-03-13 6:30 AM

Increased STDs, increased cancer rates, increased psychological treatment rates, increased medical needs/costs, increased earlier life deaths. Why would anyone, conservative Christian or other, support a lifestyle that leads to this? This does impact others in society. Because it becomes a more acceptable lifestyle in society, the number of people that participate also increase. It leads to more of the consequences above.

My wife lost a cousin who was in this lifestyle. When at family reunions, weddings and other family functions, everyone treated her just like a regular member of the family. They were kind, loving, embracing, and accepting of her. She committed suicide, drug overdose, in her mid-40's. Now she missed the rest of her life and others don't get to spend time with her. Her parents had to bury her; how sad. It does impact other people.

Have all you people that are jumping on the gay marriage bandwagon factored that into your decision?

7 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Tgrammiex4

Apr-03-13 6:40 AM

wwhickok,I agree, incest is another animal all together. But, 50 years ago did you ever think there would be a discussion on gay marriage? Who knows whats to come?

8 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eriklatranyi

Apr-03-13 7:21 AM

Reducing the age of consent will follow.

It has been done in every nation that redefined marriage to include homosexual unions.

The argument will be that people were married and bearing children at age 14 100 years ago, so why should we stop two people who love each other from getting married? So what if one is 14 and the other is 55.

You can't stand in the way of love or you are a bigoted hate-monger.

8 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Apr-03-13 8:04 AM

Interesting how the slippery slope argument always appears. It doesn't matter if the conversation is about abortion, gun control, or gay marraige, the proponents of the argument always use it as a defense.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Apr-03-13 8:11 AM

"Interesting how the slippery slope argument always appears."

+++

My wife's cousin dies earlier in life and it is trivialized!! It is forecast reality. Hard to quantify and put a number to, but real.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Apr-03-13 8:28 AM

So you are saying their premature departure was a direct result of their homosexual behavior?

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Apr-03-13 8:43 AM

So Phil, what other laws based on forbidding sin should we get rid of. Maybe that stupid "you shall not murder" or maybe "you shall not steal". If we can't have laws based on morals, then they have to go. The fact is that there is no discrimination in marriage. Homosexuals already have the same rights the rest of us have. What they want is a redefinition of marriage. Since marriage was defined by God, do you think that we have the authority to change it? The big problem, as usual, is that government has stuck it's nose in where it does not belong and has regulated marriage and bestowed special benefits (and penalties) on married people. If marriage had remained strictly a religious institution as it was intended, we would have no problem. We need to get the government out of the marriage business.

4 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SteelerFan

Apr-03-13 8:48 AM

As a Christian I believe marriage should be only between a man and a woman. Sadly, the decline in our culture is reducing the number of us who believe this way. You think my opinion is radical? Our Dear Leader felt this way only a few short years ago but now he has 'evolved'.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Apr-03-13 8:49 AM

Both murder and theft infringe upon other peoples rights. Gay marriage does not.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

johnnyad3

Apr-03-13 9:03 AM

"But, 50 years ago did you ever think there would be a discussion on gay marriage?"

100 years ago, did you ever think there would be discussion on interracial marriage?

150 years ago, did you ever think there would be discussion on women voting?

"Increased STDs, increased cancer rates, increased psychological treatment rates, increased medical needs/costs, increased earlier life deaths."

Tex - Do you have numbers backing that up? Can you compare those numbers with heterosexual drug use, std's, etc.

Good letter Phil

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Apr-03-13 9:32 AM

"Increased STDs, increased cancer rates, increased psychological treatment rates, increased medical needs/costs, increased earlier life deaths."

Heterosexuals get these diseases also. The difference is that hetrosexual couples will have a health insurance plan that will cover both were as a homosexual couple are individualized and separate. Your sexual orientation has little to do with your life span.

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Apr-03-13 9:44 AM

You know SF Rob Portman, a republican, evolved on gay marriage. Americans are evolving on gay marriage. More and more of them are changing their minds on gay marriage. Why is this possible? Because they know someone close who is gay and they are not the degenerates they were taught they were. They are people we love; relatives, siblings, sons, daughters, friends, co-workers, military, heroes, they are media personalities. They politicians, first responders, business leaders, civic leaders, doctors, lawyers, artists and so much more. But first they are human beings who are Americans. They are not sub-human.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

VinceKnauff

Apr-03-13 9:48 AM

I, a card-carrying conservative am completely in favor of gay marriage. I think gays should be allowed to be as miserable in marriage as I was. If gay marriage is not made legal then there should be some legal recognition of a partnership that equates to the rights that married couples have so questions of next-of-kin or property rights can be legally addressed. But these rights should also be as hard to dissolve as a marriage is.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

betsyross

Apr-03-13 9:54 AM

Who should define marriage? The courts or the voters? I personally don't care if lesbians and gays “marry” or if Mormons have plural marriages. The purpose of marriage in the law is to protect the offspring and since two men or two women cannot produce children it seems to me senseless that they “marry” unless of course it's for economic reasons which is a valid reason. In that case I believe there should be civil unions with the same rights and responsibilities as a heterosexual couple; they must have a legal contract uniting them and if they no longer want to be together they must legally dissolve it just as heterosexuals couples do. Each religious group must decide what kind of unions they wish to sanction not the government.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 76 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