Traditional Marriage Is Society's Best Bet

Hey Chuck, gay-marriage is not mandatory, so you don't have to worry.

How does this garbage get published? And I'm not referring to his views - this poorly written rant isn't even worthy of publication on the bathroom wall at IHOP.

I can't quite find an argument here to engage in any meaningful way. It seems to be a substandard rehash of various already refuted arguments. Or as best as I can tell, at any rate. Perhaps Mr. Colson is out of his league in trying to string words into sentences and sentences into concepts here at the Post?

Frankly, I think Chuck here got way too much of his view of what LBGT people are about from trying to sell Fundie Christianity to aggressive straight male criminals locked up with each other and looking for a macho way to call each other the b-word.

Counterww

"Homosexuality in all its forms destabilizes society."

What an ignorant statement.

People do not choose their sexual orientation.

If you don't believe it, then why don't you think about how you chose your own sexual orientation. And why don't you ask some gay people how they "chose" to be gay.

And if you don't know any gay people to ask, then I hardly see that they could much of a threat to or to anyone else.

The truth is that it is the baseless persecution of gay people that destabelizes society, breaks up families, and ruins lives.

DUDE!

Or, let's put it this way: 'Homosexuality' doesn't tear apart families.

Homophobia tears apart families.

It's as simple as that.

"Many here seem to think that since couples from heterosexual marriages divorce, then this somehow makes it okay to approve gay marriage."

No, it only makes it *ludicrous* to blame same-sex couples, or the possibility of equality under the law for straight marriages failing... In fact, the more 'biblical' you are about them, the more often they fail, and these stats go way back to before people were calling it a 'controversy' whether or not queers had the right not to get gang-raped by cops.

Many here seem to think that since couples from heterosexual marriages divorce, then this somehow makes it okay to approve gay marriage.

Homosexuality in all its forms destabilizes society.

Divorce in all it forms destabilizes society.

To encourage either is lunacy. To make one legal just because the model of marriage- one man, one woman, does not always work out, is even more lunacy.

Civil unions, go with it. But always hold up the preferable, superior model for people to follow. Biology, common sense, and religion all point to it as the best model to follow. One man, one woman bound together in marriage.

Faircloth,

Nice post, and one that is as controversial, in conditioned minds, as the idea of satanism and the Satanic Bible. Nice bit of information to chew on. Thanks.

It sounds like you would disagree with divorcé on any grounds.

Emphatically no! Marriage between a man and a woman is the foundational institution of our and every civilization. For Christians and Jews, marriage between a man and a woman is a sacred act because it was instituted by God from the very beginning of humanity (Genesis 2:24).
______________________
Err...well tell that to your fellow Christians who divorce their wives while their in the hospital to marry this cutie or that. Tell that to the Christian McCaine who divorced his wife because she was suffering the effects of a crippling accident. Tell that to all the christian pedophiles like Trump who buy their wives.

Big practice, buying wives. Used to be dowries. Now it's something else.

"marriage between a man and a woman is a sacred act because it was instituted by God from the very beginning of humanity (Genesis 2:24)."
Sir:
Obviously you don't seem to have heard of the 1st amendment to the constitution. You are making a religious argument against something that is a civil matter, and thus will never hold up against the 1st Amendment.
And what arrogance you and your religious cohorts have in saying that YOUR religious beliefs at the only ones that should be respected in our country.
Are you not aware that there are many people with sincere beliefs, including a great many Christians and Jews who think that gay marriage is as sacred as hetero marriage.
But that is immaterial anyway. No one who espouses your bigoted and hateful views has ever been able to explain how gay marriage in any way dimishes the marriages of hetero people.
Let me be honest here. I am gay, and I live with my boyfriend of 6 years (about 1 year longer than the average het marriage!!) in a little redneck Baptist town just outside Austin Texas. We work hard, play by the rules, pay our taxes, and keep our property in beautiful shape... and certainly better than the ol' redneck who used to own it. We are on good terms with our neighbours, who love us, and appreciate that we help keep an eye on the safety of their children.
In what way are we NOT a family? In what way has our "marriage" dimished the marriages of our neighbours? And who has the right in this country to make the decision that we are second-class citizens and undeserving of the rights, privileges and protections that our heterosexual neighbours have.
Sir: You and your religious bigoted friends have NEVER put up any argument why there is any overriding societal interest in our being treated in this manner.
In the ten commandments, there is a clause prohibiting bearing false witness against another. For God's sake, Sir, it is time or you to be honest, and stop lying about me, and the other 10% of our citizenry who find that our love and devotion is towards someone that YOU disappove of.
It is time, Sir, to call a spade a spade. And this is nothing more, and nothing less, than religious bigotry.
This country is better than that. And you, Sir, are nothing more than a bigot and a hypocrite. Because your constant railings about the evil nature of gays, and gay marriage are lies, and in direct contravention of that clause in the Ten Commandments that you claim to hold so dear.

Well, I guess the good news could be that the Bible doesn’t really call being a homosexual a sin! And in addition, many people don’t know that there is a very popular church that not only condones homosexual sex acts, it actually encourages them! And this is not some “backwoods” cult with just 13 members, all of whom are related to one another.
No, this a mainstream religion, acknowledged by the U.S. Military services with a person of that faith disseminating the rites and worship of the faith. At one time, it was reported to be the fastest growing religion in the U.S.
What is this religion? Satanism is the religion that encourages homosexual sex. “Satanism condones any type of sexual activity, which properly satisfies your individual desires - be it heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, or even asexual, if you choose. Satanism also sanctions any fetish or deviation which will enhance your sex life, so long as it involves no one who does not wish to be involved.”

From the Satanic Bible, The Book of Lucifer (Air), the chapter on Satanic Sex page 67

Regarding not involving anyone who does not want to be involved, the Satanic Bible makes it crystal clear that the followers are to do whatever is necessary to prevent or stop anyone or anything that prevents the follower from doing whatever he/she wants to do. The basic tenet of Satanism is "If it feels good, do it."

Oh, and what the Bible condemns is the act of homosexual sex, not the person. God doesn’t condemn us, we condemn ourselves by our actions, thoughts and attitudes. Praise God, He has made a way for us to have true love, peace and joy through renouncing our sins and turning our back on what the world has to offer and look forward to what He has to offer: an eternity of rejoicing.

The reason why we are born is to choose what set of rewards we want: the temporal ones of this world; or the eternal ones of Heaven. Read the Bible and the Satanic Bible to gain a clear understanding of the reward system of each.

thank you Rev Colson for your beliefs as well as the beliefs of MANY. There is coming a day! Oh what day that will be! Never understood why the bride would be wanting the bridegroom to hurry back so soon - knowing that she still has a chance to reach those who oppose. But read the front page of the post and I am begininig to understand.

Oh, and banning civil marriage for gays *anywhere* wouldn't be protection from such terrifying prospects of nonexistent lawsuits... Civil marriage wouldn't even have to be involved to *make* a suit on grounds of discrimination.

There's already no basis for such suits. Whether it's thrown out of court based on existing law or a new 'assurance' is pretty immaterial.

Why any couple would *want* to be married in a homophobic church in the first place, I dunno.

volkmare: "There ARE legal fees involved if clergy are not exempted from gay marriage. They will be sued by the gay activists, and probably the ACLU for refusing."

Who DOESN'T run the risk of being sued?
I suppose it's possible that some radical gay couples might file such frivolous suits, but it doesn't sound like a winner to me. Especially if they are already enjoying the CIVIL benefits of Marriage..
I haven't looked it up but can you cite a case where anyone has successfully sued a church for not marrying a couple?

Such lack of vision…

There ARE legal fees involved if clergy are not exempted from gay marriage.
They will be sued by the gay activists, and probably the ACLU for refusing.

Although they were right in exempting them, they were wrong over all in legalizing gay marriage for the reasons Mr. Colson stated and more.

Mark
Always seek the truth.

" Since I began working in the prisons more than 30 years ago, I've seen up close the results of broken, dysfunctional families--of families with no mom or no dad."

Since I began working in the private sector, for successful companies large and small, I too have seen the results of broken and dysfunctional families, of families with no mom or dad.
I call these people normal, succesful, hard working. Of the thousands of people I have known about half or so had a tragic tale of family issues. Many of them divorced themselves, single parents, etc. Hardly any of them have ever been to prison.
Yes I've met some people that got into trouble, became alcoholics, or drug users, etc. But not that many. And not all of them came from broken homes.
You spent some time as a prisoner, did you come from a broken or dysfunctional home? Were your parents gay? Is that how you ended up there?

"Marriage between a man and a woman is the foundational institution of our and every civilization"

I'm not sure what that means. "Marriage" isn't even mentioned in our constitution, you know kinda like 'god' and 'jesus' aren't mentioned, yet somehow it's almost like the founders deliberately left out the most important 'foundational institutions' when they wrote the thing. Why would they do that? Instead they wrote about the rights of the INDIVIDUAL, not the M/F married couple.

I do agree that the government should make no mandate requiring churches to participate in or sanction ANY coupling. They are private clubs and should be allowed to make rules like that for themselves.
"it will save a lot of right-believing Christians and Jewish clergy from hefty legal fees"
Can you cite a case where any church was ever required to marry anyone? This comment of yours is absurd.

"Since I began working in the prisons more than 30 years ago, I've seen up close the results of broken, dysfunctional families--of families with no mom or no dad."

So you want to *make* families with two moms or dads legally-disadvantaged in order to try and *make* them single-parent families?

This coming from someone representing the demographic with the *highest* rates of divorce and domsestic abuse out there?

*Homophobia* tears apart and destabilizes families. Not something about gay people, themselves.

This is nonsense. Clergy can refuse to perform a marriage ceremony for any reason. They don't have the right to stop someone from getting married at the courthouse or somewhere else.

There are no 'legal fees' to worry about.

Gay marriage *anywhere* has never meant churches would get sued to 'impose' it on you. It's not hard to figure that out, but some keep saying it.

So now it's clear. Your religious views don't give you the right to deny other Americans *their* equality.

"I've seen up close the results of broken, dysfunctional families--of families with no mom or no dad.:

And your point, Colson?

Weren't all of these a result of the "best bet" traditional marriages?

"Instead of undermining marriage, society has every interest in promoting healthy, stable marriages and the families they produce."

How are gay unions undermining marriage unless one of the marriage partners is bi or gay and strays with a member of his or her own sex? What threatens Colson's ilk so much about gay unions? What is so special about "traditional" marriages that often produce up to a 50% divorce rate, domestic violence, child abuse and abortions How would gay unions be any different?

I agree if a church does not want to call a gay union a "marriage" That's their right. But to use this argument to deny equal civil rights to others is to ignorantly and conveniently assume that a gay union can't possibly be a stable one.

Methinks Colson is in denial about some of his prison experiences maybe on both sides of the bars, thus the rabid homophobia.

Actually, I would be more apt to favor gay marriage if it was coupled with the repeal of no fault divorce for everyone.

Once you're married you're married, except for good cause.

Goes for everyone- gay or str8.

How come Chuck and every other one of his ilk NEVER complain about the devorce rate, and the fact that there are many, many times more unmarried hetero-couples living together (in sin as he would presume) than there are total homosexuals in the USA? If reinstituting marriage as the foundation of our civilization is the most important thing, then why do Chuck's people always focus exclusively on homosexuals? I know long-term committed homosexual couples that contribute much more to the good of society than the many divorced couples that I know who have left distruction in their wake, especially among their children's lives. Where is the greatest evil, Chuck, where?

Chuck: For Christians and Jews, marriage between a man and a woman is a sacred act because it was instituted by God from the very beginning of humanity (Genesis 2:24).
**************************************************************************************
Old Testament marriage structures were as much about the preservation of property rights as they were about progeny, and the feelings of the betrothed toward each other were irrelevant to those arranging the marriages.
Biblical marriages were a business deal. Wives were bought and sold - remember the story of Jacob? He wanted to marry Rachel, and worked for Laban in order to "earn" her, was given Leah instead, and had to work longer for Laban to get Rachel as well. One must wonder whether either Leah or Rachel had any say in the matter - most likely not.

Chuck: But the same protections are not extended to all religious believers--like owners of private businesses (florists or photographers for example), who will refuse to violate the teaching of their faith and their own consciences.
**************************************************************************************
Not once during any job interview I have ever had was I asked which sex I found more attractive. Not once.
Not once when I bought flowers have I been asked about my orientation. I was asked what combinations of colors, blooms, and greenery I wanted, what container I wanted, what I wanted written on the card, where I wanted them delivered, and whether I wanted to pay with cash or a credit card, but never which gender I was attracted to.