I have made the argument before that when we finally descend into the slippery slope of defending adultery and legalizing impossibilities like same-sex marriage, marriage no longer means anything.
As a matter of fact, it is rather paradoxical for the gay rights activists to so loudly clamor for the right to be married on one hand, when in reality, their winning the case means there is no such thing as marriage anymore. Congratulations on winning the right to enter a now-obsolete institution!
I have racked my brain for weeks, trying to determine exactly how you define marriage in today’s dictionaries. What does it mean to be married? You don’t have to be married to have sex, to have kids, to raise kids. You don’t have to be two people of opposite gender to be married. What is reserved for marriage only? Is there anything you can honesty say that sets marriage apart from non-marriage? What is it?
Gay folks clamor so loudly for the right to be married, but they cannot define what marriage even is! I think our country has finally descended into certifiable insanity when people will all but crucify each other for the right to be something when they have no clue what it even is that they want to be.
What is it, gay person, gay couple, that you are seeking within marriage? What is it that has been denied you for the countless decades when the government did not legally recognize homosexual unions as marriage? Word semantics? What fundamental right have you been deprived of for all these years that suddenly you now have?
The morning after the Supreme Court recognized “same-sex marriage”, what was different about you and your partner’s relationship? Does the amount of sex you’re allowed to unsuccessfully try to have change? No. Does the fact of whether or not you can live together change? No. Does the fact of whether or not you can have a kid together change? Nope, you still can’t, and that ain’t the government’s fault. Does your magical love bond between one another somehow change? Nope. In essence, you woke up to find that nothing about your relationship had changed, and yet, you celebrated this non-change with all the vim and vigor befitting the opening ceremonies of the Olympic games. What, precisely, were you celebrating?
In order to further explain my point, I am going to stage a rather awkward conversation that might take place between a traditional-marriage guy like myself and a gay rights activist. Since I do not have Gender Identity Disorder, I cannot converse with myself, and since I don’t have the luxury of having an LGBT rights activist in the room, I’ll carry on this conversation with my imaginary gay friend. I will speak on his behalf using the only logical arguments I can imagine him giving.
“Hey, Imaginary Gay Friend, I heard you were fighting for the right to get married.”
“That’s right! I should be allowed the same right to marriage as you!”
“That’s interesting, I thought you already had the same right as me to get married.”
“Well, I mean the right to marry my homosexual partner of the same gender.”
“Oh. Well, exactly what do you mean by married? Once you gain this right, how would you define marriage?”
“Um . . . a union of two people that love each other? I guess? I don’t know.”
“So you don’t exactly know what marriage means?”
“I guess not.”
“Why do you want to get married? What is it that you don’t have now that you will have once you are married?”
“Um . . . I don’t know. Hospital visitation and guardianship rights?”
“There are other ways to get those besides marrying a boy. What major thing is it you are seeking inside the marriage union that you don’t have now?”
“Well, tax benefits, for one thing.”
“OK, name another thing.”
“Um . . . I don’t know? A marriage license?”
“Well, that’s an awful lot to undertake just for a slip of paper. So you admit that it’s all about tax benefits? It’s all financial, all about the money?”
“No, man, it’s about love! We love each other!”
“And yet, when pressed, you cannot come up with any way you will legally be able to love each other more after you’re ‘married’ than before. All that changes is your tax status. Yet you claim it’s not about money. That makes no sense.”
“I don’t know! Just leave me alone! Love wins! Pride! Gay Pride! L-G-B-T, L-G-B-T!”
Now, at this point, I have decided to insert imaginary ear plugs to block out Imaginary Gay Friend’s imaginary mantra chant, but I think you get the point — gay rights folks don’t even know what they’re fighting for! What a bunch of noble, heroic individuals — bravely going into battle fighting for the right to . . . um, well, we don’t really know, but it’s a good cause, trust us!
Marriage is not a civic institution.
That’s right. You read that right. Marriage is not a civic institution. This is evident from the fact that the sanctity, commitment, and permanence of marriage are not legally protected. The U.S. government did not come up with the idea of marriage — that was around a long time before the 18th century. Even in the U.S., it’s still legal to cheat on your spouse. It’s legal to end your marriage, which you vowed at the altar was permanent. It’s legal to have sex before and after marriage, with your partner or not, as long as the other individual consents and is of age.
Marriage is actually a moral institution, because its vows are made before God, and the permanency and commitment to actually not cheat, to not have sex outside of marriage, and to stay together requires going beyond the law. See, it’s legal to cheat, but not morally right. It’s legal to have sex before marriage, but not morally right. At least, to some people. At any rate, the issues that define marriage, that have defined marriage for centuries — permanency, commitment, childbirth and raising, intimacy — are all issues of morality. Do you see what I’m saying?
As far as the legal side goes, marriage is simply a moral institution that is recognized by the state. They don’t define, invent, or control marriage, because there is no legal definition for it — they simply recognize it’s existence.
So, therefore, legally, marriage means nothing more than a slip of paper and some tax stuff. It stands to reason, therefore, that the only significance marriage has is a moral significance. The only real substantive definition marriage has is a moral one.
So, same-sex partners who want to be married must want the same moral significance to their marriage as Christians do when they get married. Apparently that is the case. I have just removed any other logical argument for you wanting to get married, so if that is not the case, then you don’t have a leg to stand on.
If you want the government stepping in to define marriage, it must mean you want the United States government to determine your morals. Or, better yet, you want your morality made into law, which is the same thing you are accusing Christians of doing. “You can’t make your morals and values and Bible verses into law!” they say. Yet, when we admit that marriage is a moral institution, and they want the government to step in and define and control it and force it’s definition upon us, then they are pushing to make their morality, however twisted, into law!
Goodness, my brain is starting to hurt from trying to dig deep and discover what is at the heart of the LGBT agenda. Perhaps I should stop trying, and just admit that they really are nothing more than illogical people spouting random ramblings about which they know really nothing, and that don’t even have to have logic and common sense behind them. “We want marriage — but we don’t even know what marriage is.” “We want our moral institution to be legalized — but you can’t legislate your morals.” “We want your rights to end when they encroach upon our morals, but our rights can encroach the garbage out of your morals all day and we don’t care. As a matter of fact, we will spit it your face and trample you in the mud while encroaching upon your morals to flaunt our own.”
Let’s just stop looking for sense in their arguments. There is none. When it boils down to it, they are selfish little children crying because things didn’t go their way, and therefore want Big Daddy Government to step in and “make the bad guy go away”. Their arguments don’t have to make sense. They never do. They find buzz-words like “discrimination”, “hate”, “bigotry”, and toss them around because those are the cool words on the block, all the while having no clue what those words even mean (and if they were educated in out public schools, they probably have to copy and paste, rather than try to spell them without help — there’s another argument for another day).
Folks, marriage means something. And it means something moral. It’s fine for the government to recognize marriage, but they don’t own it, nor can they redefine it. They didn’t come up with it. Furthermore, marriage most likely doesn’t mean anything to the same-sex agenda-pushers that lobby for it. They just want media attention and nominal victory, even if it means absolutely squat in the real significance of things.
Is your head spinning yet from all their nonsense? Mine is. Break time.