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

A simple solution

January 19, 2014

I propose a simple and sensible solution to end the conflict over gay marriage. The government should get out of the marriage business. Perio....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(28)

mikekerstetter

Jan-19-14 5:11 AM

The gay marriage debate has been lost and it will soon be the law of the land in all 50 states. As some of us predicted, gay marriage will open the doors to others seeking to marry that were previously denied, IE Polygamists, who recently had a judge rule that denying them marriage rights was in violation of the Constitution.

The fight now becomes will the Churches/Pastors be forced to perform/recognise Gay Marriage (and others, as they too are legalized) and will pointing out that our religious belief that Homosexuality is a sin become a 'hate crime' punishable by criminal and legal sanctions for the individual and the Church as a whole.

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eriklatranyi

Jan-19-14 6:45 AM

Why is the gov't involved in marriage at all?

Well, at one time, gov't thought it should promote the family unit and procreation, so it put incentives in place.

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ritty77

Jan-19-14 7:04 AM

I thought marriage was a legal (government licensed) contract, and the religious aspects of marriage was the optional part.

A legal marriage gives the spouses parental, visitation, and social security benefits rights, among others. Isn't that the basis for gay marriage, to have these legal (not religious) aspects apply to them?

If government is not involved in marriage, then what is the point of marriage? Wouldn't it be just a symbolic union free of rights and responsibilities?

9 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JohnZook

Jan-19-14 8:38 AM

Ritty, Ritty, Ritty.... take a breath! Yikes!!!! My guide book, the Bible, says nothing about gov't controlled marriage. I went down to the court house to register our marriage and then a Pastor married my wife and I. Gov't only gets involved for taxation purposes. Big Brother has no civil reason to be involved as it's between Man and God.

3 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ritty77

Jan-19-14 9:10 AM

My parents were married at the the magistrate's office. There was no religion involved.

Does your guide book say anything about being respectful when directing a comment to someone? Re-read that part. In the meantime, go **** yourself.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rick424

Jan-19-14 9:34 AM

I am sorry Ritty but I had to hit the agree button on your comments.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ritty77

Jan-19-14 9:50 AM

Thanks, Rick. People seem to have this gay marriage thing backwards. Opponents base their opposition on religious grounds, or it's just weird, or it changes the meaning of the word. That's all fine with me.

But supporters aren't looking for others' approval, they're looking for the LEGAL rights and responsibilities that come with being married legally, and if they want a religious ceremony, fine, find a religion that sanctions it.

But surely, one way to turn people against any religious discussion is to be unnecessarily and instantly repellent, like Mr. Zook.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Jan-19-14 9:51 AM

Good post Ritty!

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

underwood

Jan-19-14 10:05 AM

Ritty is dead on point. Whatever you call it, it's a legal contract and that's the limit of government involvement.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-19-14 10:24 AM

It's true, that as far as the Government is concerned, it's a legal contract.

That doesn't change the fact that the Word of God says that Marriage was instituted by God and is one man and one woman. I'm convinced, as I stated before, that, one day in the not to distant future, a Pastor who refuses to officiate at a gay marriage or anyone who calls homosexuality a sin or an abomination before God (both from the Word of God) will be labeled a hater and be prosecuted for it.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sideliner

Jan-19-14 10:28 AM

Ritty, I too like Rick, had to hit Agree on your comments.

With that said, I have to ask why the focus of the gay marriage thing is more on the "abomination" of the sex act between same sex individuals rather than the deep love, commitment, and devotion between these individuals.

I get why the state has to be involved in marriage: custody of children, division of property, taxation, etc. The state does, however, need to stay out of the bedroom.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DocWoody

Jan-19-14 10:51 AM

Gay marriage issues have are convoluted because of the 'religious' fanatics/homophobes using the Bible as their 'source' against it. Marriage is a LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT, has NOTHING to do with religion UNLESS you choose to make a ceremony religious based. Technically when you register your car, you could turn that event into a religious ceremony as well, however it's just a LEGAL issue. The Bible thumpers have a right to their opinion however the Bible is not the be all/end all. There are plenty of laws and legislation NOT in the Bible no one seems to be concerned with. If you look at the age range it's older folks who grew up in the anti-gay 50's, 60's, 70's, etc. Ask any 16-30 year old now and the 'stigma' has changed and religion is declining! Many over 60 still use the "N" word it was the 'norm' in their youth and thumpin' that Bible against Black's having rights. In a few years gay marriage will be the norm like Black rights. It's coming like or not!!!

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

underwood

Jan-19-14 11:06 AM

We should respect the beliefs of others, but that doesn’t mean those beliefs should be imposed upon everyone else by the force of government. Those beliefs also shouldn’t be a basis for punishing others by law for personal choices that are considered wrong by a particular belief, but don’t infringe upon the right’s of others.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-19-14 11:11 AM

Doc, ask the J ews in Germany if the norm of the 1930's and 1940's made it right.

My point being, just because a society accepts something doesn't necessarily make it right.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Alsever

Jan-19-14 11:12 AM

Rev. Moon had the solution--He was the ONLY one who picked marriage partners for ALL church members! They had no choice--believe he was Christian and used Bible to justify his actions.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eriklatranyi

Jan-19-14 11:31 AM

I think most missed the point.

We do not need the gov't to define what is marriage....of any kind.

Yes, it is a legal contract that any two (or more) people could draw up with a lawyer.

We do not need the gov't to do that.

But, now that marriage has been redefined to be, essentially, meaningless, the term can be used to cover polygamy, **********, objecticum, etc.

There is no basis to deny marriage to any group that wishes to have it.

The LTE was suggesting eliminating gov't from the equation and using legal contracts instead.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Jan-19-14 1:26 PM

Who cares? Ritty you were spot on.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

underwood

Jan-19-14 3:48 PM

Marriage can be defined any way you prefer to define it. A legal contract can be between individuals no matter how you choose to define their relationship. The main question here is what benefits and rights are accorded the relationship.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rmiller

Jan-19-14 5:59 PM

z'Rev. Moon had the solution--He was the ONLY one who picked marriage partners for ALL church members! They had no choice--believe he was Christian and used Bible to justify his actions.z'

Now, who is trolling, being racist and a bigot?

As a Christian, this type of commentary could be offensive, but I choose to consider the source.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rmiller

Jan-19-14 6:01 PM

"Marriage can be defined any way you prefer to define it"

Marriage is not defined any way we prefer it to...for we as Christians, it is defined as one man/one woman, as God defines it.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

underwood

Jan-19-14 7:10 PM

t Relene, not everyone is a Christian.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DocWoody

Jan-20-14 10:30 AM

mikekerstetter: You missed the point. It's not'just because' it's accepted. The LGBT folk want EQUAL RIGHTS as once the Blacks i.e.LEGAL rights. LEGAL RIGHTS are not religious other than BIBLE THUMPERS use it to suit their own agenda. Homosexuality is naturally occurring in man as well as 450 species. If you are human, white, black, asian, gay, straight,etc. you deserve the same LEGAL rights!! The Bible thumpers are trying to control government using the Bible while many are suppressing their own sexuality by hiding behind it.Homophobia is a fear based phobia. However the basis of that 'fear' for MANY is the fear someone will find out they've been down the gay road or considered it. They hide behind overt Homophobic, Bible thumping in fear someone will find out about their gay indiscretions or desires. Marriage is not about religion it's about legal rights. People 'choose' to include religion in their ceremony it's a 'choice'!! Over decades religion has been convoluted with legalities

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-20-14 10:52 AM

Doc, the homophobe argument doesn't work with me. I've got family and quite a few friends who are gay. They respect my opinion and I respect theirs. It is possible to disagree without being disagreeable.

You say "The Bible thumpers are trying to control government using the Bible.' Well, yeah, since that is where we get our moral values from, it would stand to reason that is the case. And, since all laws are made to regulate morals of one type or another, the question becomes whose morals are we using as a basis for our laws.

If, as you say, the LGBTI community wanted equal rights under the law, they could have done so without redefining marriage, which has been around for thousands of years and has always been a man and a woman.

There are studies that found that gay sex and the gay lifestyle shorten the participants life span by many years due to disease, stress and unhealthy living. So it's not just a social issue. All one has to so is look at the HIV/AIDS problem.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JohnZook

Jan-20-14 6:02 PM

Ritty- All I said was that gov't does not have any business in anyone's marriage. As far as me going to **** myself, that's a pretty strong rebuttal to a different opinion. I hope you and your gov't managed marriage works well. By the way, where did marriage originate?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ritty77

Jan-20-14 10:54 PM

No Dick, you said my name three times, told me to take a breath, said Yikes, and used a total of six exclamation points.

There was nothing breathless about my post. It did not warrant that condescending, hysterical response. Your failure to see that and then put the blame back on me suggests maybe you should direct your comments elsewhere. I have enough trolls to deal with.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 28 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