In response to:

Beck, Marriage and The State of The Union

GPeyton Wrote: Dec 07, 2012 3:52 PM
"Okay, it’s a civil question that deserves a civil answer: Children need and children have a right to the married love of a mother and father" This is a really dangerous statement thrown out with no supporting logic. Please reconsider.
Andy544 Wrote: Dec 07, 2012 4:35 PM
What a idiotical comment. Making the assertion 'Children need the love of married father and mother' is DANGEROUS? The stupidity and total lack of moral understanding of your comment is beyond fathoming.
Andy544 Wrote: Dec 07, 2012 5:59 PM
Too bad you don't understand the vital importance in the upbringing of a child for having both a father and a mother (married to each other, the ones who begot, conceived and bore them) Children who LACK those 'kind' of parents are at a tremendous disadvantage!
rmccarthy Wrote: Dec 07, 2012 9:47 PM
Promoting the ideal is fine. However, many circumstances are much less than ideal and would be excluded under your way of thinking. Most of the inhabitants of this planet are struggling through less than ideal conditions and cry out for love, companionship, support, understanding...which it seems only comes from Jesus. Thank you God for loving all of us so much.
GPeyton Wrote: Dec 08, 2012 4:10 PM
Indeed they are, and I have a child born in wedlock to a mother and father who place him above all else, so don't lecture more about understanding the importance of marriage.

What you don't seem to understand is the concept of a RIGHT. Calling it a RIGHT to a mother and father is the sort of thinking that allows mindless bureaucrats to take children from a parent in an unfortunate situation. I lost 3 friends in their 30s to cancer; all three had spouses and children. Should the children be taken away because someone else says they have a RIGHT to a mother and father?

That's the sort of thinking insane UN bozos come up with. and that's why you can't call something like parenthood within a committed marriage a RIGHT.
GPeyton Wrote: Dec 08, 2012 4:10 PM
Thank you for understanding my point.

My buddy, Glenn Beck, has made a great contribution to the TEA party movement and to a renewal of popular interest in our Founding Fathers and their ideals. For all that he deserves praise.

But, I believe, he is making a serious error in abandoning the civil right of marriage. The Republican Party was founded in opposition to two historic wrongs. The party’s first platform in 1856 denounced “slavery and polygamy—the twin relics of barbarism.” Slavery was finally put down with a terrible toll—630,000 Americans dead in the Civil War. The new movie, Lincoln, tells the dramatic story of the...