Liberty for All: New Hampshire's Gay Marriage Law

IN REPLY TO (IRT) :
“HOMOSEXUAL GAY SEX UNDERMINES THE FAMILY, SOCIETY, AND WOMEN.”

A massive exercise in social engineering has been unleashed to undermine and destroy the traditional rights and power that women have long enjoyed in traditional society. Briefly stated the emphasis has been shifted from content to process. As George
Gilder observed over 20 years ago in his book Sexual Suicide, most people enjoy their real satisfaction and gratification, not at work, but in the domestic and sexual aspects of life.

The new technology of reproduction has in fact separates women from their own femininity, assures the bondage of women to male technocracy, and removes men from the civilizing and socialization process of responsible fatherhood.

Men are freed to pursue their own sterile and, without woman, meaningless, sexual cycles in uncivilized groups, while technology sustains the community. In the pursuit of a nonexistent and unattainable equality, women have been induced to forsake their true nature and to relinquish their natural erotic power over men.

In the process, women have been deluded into becoming a subordinate class. In an authentic sexual society, the female physique is dominant.
Man becomes dependent on the woman's love for him. He relies on her for sexual identity in a way in which she, who already has a sexual identity, never has to rely on him. She can bear a child whether he stays or not, while he loses his child if she leaves.

His tie to the future, and his engagement in civilized society, passes through her womb. As Gilder states, in a sexually suicidal society, the male body becomes the physical ideal, and the male pattern of insecurity, dominance, and group aggression will prevail over domestic, and individual values.

Society forces others to underwrite and support marriage, not because marriage is good for the couple, but because it is good for the children, they produce. A union that cannot produce children is not one that the rest of society should be forced to subsidize. Thus, even if homosexuals can and do form permanent, emotionally serious partnerships, they do not merit the formal recognition of marriage.

Attempts to redefine the institution of marriage to accommodate same-sex or gay marriage diminish marriage and inflict serious harm on the prestige and morale of those who make major economic and personal sacrifices to create and sustain their families.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
LEPIDOPTERYX :
“HOMOSEXUAL GAY SEX UNDERMINES THE FAMILY, SOCIETY, AND WOMEN.”

ANS:
“Traditional Family Marginalized by Artificial Birth Control”

Much of the economic and social confusion in society is the logical consequence of the moral unraveling of the family and the reduced status of women due to the artificial suppression of her natural vocation within the home, which is motherhood.

Scientific and technological progress has had a leveling effect on society, which tends to minimize and marginalize this special vocation of women. While some medical advances have extended life and made it more livable, other technologies, particularly in the area of biological and genetic engineering, have destabilized society and confused the traditional understanding of the difference between right and wrong.

The invention of various birth control devices has confused the fundamental relationship between love and sex and challenged the collective wisdom concerning the general and specific ends of human sexuality and human existence.

The widespread, uncritical acceptance of birth control has unleashed a sexual revolution that based on the principle of sex for pleasure that has lead to all and any form of sexual and pseudosexual activity.

The order and continuity of the long term rhythm of the female sexual cycle which links past and future generations has been destroyed and with it the sense of meaning in life which is essential for the psychological growth of both men and women. Having abandoned their own true sexuality, women are now encouraged to emulate, the immaturity and aggression of male sexuality.

CC, even if clergy did perform plural weddings, they wouldn't be legally binding, so your concern isn't relevant to the issue.

No, the subject doesn't involve that, CCNL.

I agree with Ms. Taylor here completely.

Hmmm, since the subject involves the clergy and "marriage", one assumes Muslim clergy MEN (clerics, imams, mullahs?) in the USA must be careful in not performing weddings for polygamists. i.e. polygamy violates all state and federal laws in the USA but is allowed by the koran for MEN only.)