Post # 1
I am from NC and was really disappointed that Amendment 1 passed. Arguments for the amendment included ones saying that if traditional marriage between a man and a woman was disturbed that there would be a decline in marriages altogether, which for them would be a bad thing. All that talk about marriage and it being the only way to live made me twinge a bit. I’m super excited to marry Fiance but I felt a bit of the ick factor for a minute or two. Its like telling people that missionary sex is the only proper way. Nobody wants to be told what they should and shouldn’t do. Do you think they are helping or actually hurting their own cause?
Post # 3
@DecoRapture: well if their cause is to ban same sex marriage, I would say that they’re appealing to most of the people who hold the opinion that gay marriage destroys the sanctity of marriage–or whatever
Post # 4
- Wedding: March 2012 - Pelican Grand Beach Resort
I think it hurts their arguement, but for legal reasons. This definition of marriage comes from a religious context, but not all marriage happens in a religious context anymore. So, opponents of same-sex marriage MUST recognize that the definition of marriage has generalized over the last 300 years to expand beyond something that has sanctity and is sacred. That religious definition exists side-by-side withe the definition of marriage as the legal union of two consenting adults. Because of this, all claims to “traditional” or “sacred” definitions as the only definitions are invalid. That makes it purely a civil rights issue. We are excluding some people from a legal standing that everyone else gets to enjoy. For me, it’s shameful to exclude others from a legal status I enjoy because of faulty definitions that contradict our established sparation of church and state.