Revolution!

Organist · Senior Member

Revolution!

Pt314 · Senior Member

Excellent article.

Opposing Same Sex Marriage has nothing to do with hating people, like the 'Gay-Rights' front wants everyone to believe. It has everything to do with preserving the meaning of marriage and family, and having the right to raise your children with traditional values, without the government coercing you to accept their values.

If we as a people are forced to accept a new philosophy by the government, we are not a free people.

I don't want to live in a country like Germany, where homeschooling is forbidden, and the state has the right to take children from their parents because they aren't getting the proper 'sex education'.

arbilad · Head Chef

Interesting. Orson Scott Card didn't strike me as the revolutionary type.

arbilad · Head Chef

Although this does remind me of a quote I heard. I forget the attribution. But the person said that governments are like diapers: they should be changed often and for the same reason.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

"Marriage is, if anything, more vital, more central, than property."

Sorry, I really don't agree with this at all.

I also don't see how same sex marriage is *threatening* to anyone who wants to have a hetero marriage.

Once property rights are gone - well, to me that's a much bigger deal.

arbilad · Head Chef

Coco, family is the foundation of our religion. Property is not. Therefore, family is more important to us than property.
And ss "marriage" is most definitely a threat to marriage. Consider this example. What if I were to want to enter a tricycle in a horse show? What if I were to insist that they had no right to discriminate against me just because I prefer a tricycle over a horse for recreation? What if, as amazing as it sounds, I somehow bullied my way into getting the tricycle entered into the horse show, as well as the rules changed so that my tricycle could compete with horses on an even basis? Would that not essentially change the meaning of a horse show? It's the same thing with ss "marriage". By trying to force us to tolerate their lifestyle they endanger the very meaning of marriage, just as a horse show wouldn't really be a horse show if tricycles started participating on an even basis with horses.
True, there are many attacks on marriage. But, to extend my example, you don't have to allow tricycles in your horse show just because some people are coming to the show with sick or lame horses.

mirkwood · Senior Bucketkeeper

Good analogy.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

Hmm... if someone in a ssmarriage is now allowed to inherit their "spouse's" estate, how exactly does that harm me?

I'm not talking about the principle of it so much.. obviously, none of us "believe" in it, I don't think.

What will change as far as laws go? Exactly? I mean, there will always be those relationships. How it keeps me from fully living the gospel I just don't see. But when they can take property, that seems so much more "basic." There are thousands of single people who are faithful LDSs and may never have temple marriages in this life. If ss couples obtain a "legal" marriage, how does that make any of us worse off? Once property rights are gone, I just think we're so much closer to ... well, not wanting to sound like a freak... some sort of new government. Once they take property, I feel like religious rights are on the coattails. I find that more threatening to our religious freedoms.

-- Edited by Cocobeem at 07:09, 2008-08-02

hiccups · Future Queen in Zion

Maybe to understand, Coco, think less about how it effects you and more about how it effects the future generation-- the world your children will inherit. How many more hearts will be led astray by the belief that ss mariage is normal and appropriate? How many will discount the beliefs of the church because we teacher otherwise? This is the type of societal moral choice that will greatly effect the moral climate of our country and there will be spiritual casualities among those we care for.

We have been told repeatedly that our prosperity in this land is directly related to our obedience to commandments. SS mariage is a major step in the wrong direction. My thinking is that if the Lord has to withdraw his protection due to our bad moral choices, our goverment could be destroyed and property rights along with many other liberties would disappear in the blink of an eye. Our liberty comes from the right choices we make. And not just on a personal level, when society makes enough wrong choices, the future generation will be effected down to a personal level. It happened repeatedly in the BoM and eventually led to the destruction of their society. And that was even after having had a period of righteousness like nothing we've seen in more modern times.

To me, accepting ss marriage and loss of property rights isn't a "which is worse?" it's a lot more like an "if/then" statement.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

Yo, I'm not like gonna' vote in favor of ss marriage or something. I'm just sayin' I don't see it as WAY worse than losing our property rights.

And as for the future generation, the percentage of "righteous" people dwindling, the elect being deceived, etc... I look at it more like a polarization. (Hey! Kinda' like the rich and poor!) It may look like there's more people turning to evil, but really they did not have the mettle in the first place. The luke-warms will be threshed out, in other words.

'Course, I'm kinda' cynical that way.