Obama had clearly made up his mind some time ago. Now he’s done the right thing. Maybe not the best example of leadership, but he at least stepped up to the plate and swung, which is more than we’ll ever get from Romney. Who said just last weekend that marriage has always between “one man and one woman,” ignoring his very own great-grandfather. Romney had a chance to make a coherent, intelligent argument about marriage, but settled for weaseling out, just like every other time he’s had a challenge of character.
In 1886, a Judge Valentine ruled that two free-love activists, Lillian Harman and Edwin Walker, did not have a valid marriage even under common-law rules because their union did not fulfill the traditional characteristics. The “essentials” of marriage which Valentine listed included: life-long commitment, a wife’s obedience to the husband, the husband’s absolute control over all property, the wife taking the husband’s last name, the right of the husband to force sexual intercourse on an unwilling wife (that would be rape, by the way), and the right of the husband to control and have custody of any children.
Valentine’s decision mirrors the arguments made by opponents of gay marriage today. His sincerity and conviction were no less than the sincerity and conviction of those who claim that a valid marriage, by definition, cannot exist for same-sex couples. The things which Valentine regarded as absolutely essential and indispensable to marriage are today unnecessary for most who marry. Thus it’s not enough for opponents of gay marriage to simply assert that it would be contrary to the definition of marriage. Instead, they must explain why it is essential to the definition of marriage that a couple must consist of different sexes, and moreover why a change to include gay couples would be any less valid (or any more of a danger) than the changes we’ve experienced since Valentine’s day.
The simple fact is that “religious” segment of the “public” condemning Obama for his simple statement of PERSONAL VIEW that “civil rights” belong to everyone, is vocal about "god’s punishment’ and only a half step away from stoning anyone they don’t agree with. Just think if we didn’t have our other laws to keep them in check. Oh, wait, that’s what they’re really aiming for! Theocracy = brutal totalitarian evil.
As someone with a significant history with the “Community,” I can tell you that gays (and many of his more liberal supporters) were getting ready to jump the Obama ship en masse. They expected this three years ago, and weren’t particularly happy how Obama’s been dragging his feet on the issue. Time for payback, Barry!
I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of…Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all." From: The Age of Reason by Thomas Paine, pp. 8,9
“Twenty times in the course of my late reading, have I been upon the point of breaking out, “This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!”John Adams
. “Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.”James Madison
“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.” Treaty of Tripoli, 1797
These men were referring to God as a creator only. There are many more instances of them questioning or outright disagreeing with the basic moral teachings of Christian tradition. Ben Franklin believed the teachings of Jesus had become so corrupted that he had no patience for “modern” Christian thought or morality (he was rumored to have had as many as 60 bastard children). So they were talking about ALL men being created equal and being afforded the same rights, regardless of any persuasion. If any right or privilege is given to one, it must be given to all.
ARodney almost 12 years ago
Obama had clearly made up his mind some time ago. Now he’s done the right thing. Maybe not the best example of leadership, but he at least stepped up to the plate and swung, which is more than we’ll ever get from Romney. Who said just last weekend that marriage has always between “one man and one woman,” ignoring his very own great-grandfather. Romney had a chance to make a coherent, intelligent argument about marriage, but settled for weaseling out, just like every other time he’s had a challenge of character.
charliekane almost 12 years ago
In 1886, a Judge Valentine ruled that two free-love activists, Lillian Harman and Edwin Walker, did not have a valid marriage even under common-law rules because their union did not fulfill the traditional characteristics. The “essentials” of marriage which Valentine listed included: life-long commitment, a wife’s obedience to the husband, the husband’s absolute control over all property, the wife taking the husband’s last name, the right of the husband to force sexual intercourse on an unwilling wife (that would be rape, by the way), and the right of the husband to control and have custody of any children.
Valentine’s decision mirrors the arguments made by opponents of gay marriage today. His sincerity and conviction were no less than the sincerity and conviction of those who claim that a valid marriage, by definition, cannot exist for same-sex couples. The things which Valentine regarded as absolutely essential and indispensable to marriage are today unnecessary for most who marry. Thus it’s not enough for opponents of gay marriage to simply assert that it would be contrary to the definition of marriage. Instead, they must explain why it is essential to the definition of marriage that a couple must consist of different sexes, and moreover why a change to include gay couples would be any less valid (or any more of a danger) than the changes we’ve experienced since Valentine’s day.
From:http://atheism.about.com/od/gaymarriage/a/MarriageDefinit.htm
Dtroutma almost 12 years ago
The simple fact is that “religious” segment of the “public” condemning Obama for his simple statement of PERSONAL VIEW that “civil rights” belong to everyone, is vocal about "god’s punishment’ and only a half step away from stoning anyone they don’t agree with. Just think if we didn’t have our other laws to keep them in check. Oh, wait, that’s what they’re really aiming for! Theocracy = brutal totalitarian evil.
perceptor3 almost 12 years ago
As someone with a significant history with the “Community,” I can tell you that gays (and many of his more liberal supporters) were getting ready to jump the Obama ship en masse. They expected this three years ago, and weren’t particularly happy how Obama’s been dragging his feet on the issue. Time for payback, Barry!
Fourcrows almost 12 years ago
“I don’t think Lincoln was talking about gay marriage”
That’s the Declaration of Independence, Ima. Lincoln didn’t write that. You’ll probably discuss the founding documents when you get to seventh grade.
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 12 years ago
It wasn’t speaking of outlawing slavery, either or legalizing interracial marriage. Your logic is sound. *
Fourcrows almost 12 years ago
I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of…Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all." From: The Age of Reason by Thomas Paine, pp. 8,9
“Twenty times in the course of my late reading, have I been upon the point of breaking out, “This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!”John Adams
. “Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.”James Madison
“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.” Treaty of Tripoli, 1797
These men were referring to God as a creator only. There are many more instances of them questioning or outright disagreeing with the basic moral teachings of Christian tradition. Ben Franklin believed the teachings of Jesus had become so corrupted that he had no patience for “modern” Christian thought or morality (he was rumored to have had as many as 60 bastard children). So they were talking about ALL men being created equal and being afforded the same rights, regardless of any persuasion. If any right or privilege is given to one, it must be given to all.