The plank on marriage in the 2008 GOP Platform is worth reading:
Because our children’s future is best preserved within the traditional understanding of marriage, we call for a constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage as a union of a man and a woman, so that judges cannot make other arrangements equivalent to it. In the absence of a national amendment, we support the right of the people of the various states to affirm traditional marriage through state initiatives.
Republicans recognize the importance of having in the home a father and a mother who are married. The two-parent family still provides the best environment of stability, discipline, responsibility, and character. Children in homes without fathers are more likely to commit a crime, drop out of school, become violent, become teen parents, use illegal drugs, become mired in poverty, or have emotional or behavioral problems. We support the courageous efforts of single-parent families to provide a stable home for their children. Children are our nation’s most precious resource. We also salute and support the efforts of foster and adoptive families.
Republicans have been at the forefront of protecting traditional marriage laws, both in the states and in Congress. A Republican Congress enacted the Defense of Marriage Act, affirming the right of states not to recognize same-sex “marriages” licensed in other states. Unbelievably, the Democratic Party has now pledged to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which would subject every state to the redefinition of marriage by a judge without ever allowing the people to vote on the matter. We also urge Congress to use its Article III, Section 2 power to prevent activist federal judges from imposing upon the rest of the nation the judicial activism in Massachusetts and California. We also encourage states to review their marriage and divorce laws in order to strengthen marriage.
As the family is our basic unit of society, we oppose initiatives to erode parental rights.
Well said!
And thanks to the Republican Party for making a clear stand in favor of marriage and families!
HT to Men's News Daily.
6 comments:
Red states typically have the highest divorce statistics in the country, and not to name names or anything (*cough* Larry Craig, Ted Haggard, Mark Foley *cough*), but if there's a gay sex scandal, it's likely to involve a "straight," married, God-fearing, pro-family, anti-homosexual Republican, who takes time out of his busy gay-bashing schedule to cheat on his wife with a mystery man in the Minneapolis airport restroom.
But God bless 'em for trying!
And allowing two men sodomizing each other to call their relationship "marriage" would make things so much better.
Great strategy...in the wrong direction.
Way to ignore your party's hypocrisy.
Gay activists are asking for too much by demanding that their relationships be called "marriages." If Christians are so terrified about those big mean gay bullies stealing their precious word, we should let them keep it and maybe they'll stop crying. I'm in favor of civil unions/domestic partnerships that offer some but not all of the legal benefits of marriage, excluding adoption rights. Different term, lower status, traditional families will stay the same, and you won't lose a single right. Everybody's happy.
That way, the Marriage Club can keep its "no queers allowed" rule, and people like me and my partner might be able to live our lives without the "moral" conservatives breathing down our necks, worrying about when, where, and how often we sodomize each other - not that it's any of their business anyway.
(Really Bob, must you always fixate on gay sex? You seem to work it into the converesation any way you can.)
I'd be happy to stop talking about homosexual sex...as soon as homosexual activists stop demanding everyone accept it as legitimate.
Civil unions and domestic partnerships have to go, too. They're nothing but "marriage lite" and a simple step that has been used to inch closer to the concept of homosexual "marriage."
There is simply nothing legitimate about homosexual sex, as there is nothing legitimate about heterosexual sex outside of a marriage relationship.
There is no reason whatsoever to give official recognition to something that has no legitimacy.
If you feel so strongly about maintaining "legitimate" relationships, tell me what specific efforts you're making to ensure that heterosexual domestic partnerships and unions are outlawed. Currently, straight couples can live together, raise children, and contribute to society outside the bond of marriage (with some of your tax dollars helping them along the way, I might add), and you're sitting there allowing it to happen. Maybe you should spend more time improving God's "most sacred institution" rather than worrying about the ways you think it will worsen.
If you will take the time to check, you will notice that I condemn heterosexual shackups as well.
There are a couple of things you should consider also.
In many cases, official "domestic partnership" arrangements are denied to heterosexual shackup couples while being afforded to homosexual couples. While I agree that heterosexual shackups have done nothing to deserve official recognition, neither have homosexual ones. What's more, these official recognitions lend credibility and aid to a practice that is unnatural, unhealthy and immoral.
Another thing to consider is that there really is no significant advocacy going on for legitimizing heterosexual shackups. There is, however, a very organized, determined, powerful and prolific advocacy effort to legitimize homosexual behavior.
While we should do everything we can to encourage heterosexual shackups to make their arrangements legitimate, we must not ignore that the by-far most aggressive assault on marriage and family is coming from homosexual activists and their useful idiots.
Post a Comment