In response to:

The Opposite of the Civil Rights Movement

Diogenese_wy Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 5:22 PM
Traditional marriage is made up of two parts, civil and religious. 1) You must obtain a marriage license from the state and it must be signed by both you and your spouse and an official designated by the state, and then must be filed with the state. This is a civil contract. 2) The second part, religious, is the blessing of the church and the sanctification of your union by God. It appears that the second part is what the gay community desires for they are already allowed the civil union, which is their right under law. Then the issue in “gay marriage laws” is to force the “church’ to recognize them through legislative and judicial means thus gaining the ‘blessing’ of God who has declared their life style sinful and an abomination.
David3036 Wrote: Feb 08, 2013 6:58 AM
That is just patently false -- the exact opposite of what the movement is about. Gays can already have a church ceremony anythime they choose -- even in many mainstream denominations. What the CANNOT have are the rights of marriage that are written into more than a thousand federal laws. Even if they are legally married in a gay-marriage state, the Defense of Marriage Act precludes any recognition for federal benefits under Social Security rules, immigration law, tax law, inheritance, military and veterans benefits. Those things definitely do NOT come with a "civil union."

Churches CANNOT be "forced" to marry anyone. They have never been "forced" to marry divorced people or someone of another faith, & they can/t be forced to marry gays.
Jack2894 Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 5:31 PM
ABsurd. I never entered a church and God was not mentioned in my marriage ceremony. But I am married nonetheless.
Roy323 Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 9:08 PM
Jack2894-"I never entered a church and God was not mentioned in my marriage ceremony"-That may be more common than some think. I was married in a US Consulate and while on leave from my Military Service in Vietnam. I was then lucky enough to Hitch a ride on an Air America flight back to the "nam!"

NOTE: This is the first column in a series of columns related to National Marriage Week, Feb. 7-14, 2013.

Those who remember the old version of the SAT might recall the analogy section: “This is to that as that is to this.”

The SAT no longer requires students to demonstrate aptitude in reasoning through this vital cognitive exercise—unfortunate because so many Americans find it difficult to recognize false analogies. And no group has exploited this deficiency more than politicians.

Adam Cohen observed in a 2005 New York Times piece: “Intentionally misleading comparisons are becoming the dominant mode of public discourse....