In response to:

Redefining Marriage Sign of a Lost Society

Patriot155 Wrote: Nov 26, 2012 11:05 AM
So let me see if I have this correct. You say that heterosexuals damaged marriage along time ago when they started having sex out of wedlock, divorces and so forth.....etc. So this is justification to redifine the very basic components of marriage to suit the lifestyels of of alittle over 3% of the population?
Tinsldr2 Wrote: Nov 26, 2012 1:03 PM
Yes,

If you went to school and the teacher said to be tolerant of Gays and not bully them etc would you be gay today??

Would you love your wife less?
Anominus Wrote: Nov 26, 2012 11:36 AM
"Allowing a same sex couple to get married will not effect the marriages of the rest of us. Our marriages are much more effected by the actions of the more numerous fellow Hetero's"

Prove it. I don't see the government pushing classes on "how to fail in a marriage," but do I see them pushing homosexual "values" in the public schools. You really think that such influence will *not* effect the future of traditional marriage?
Tinsldr2 Wrote: Nov 26, 2012 11:26 AM
No you dont have it correct.

Allowing a same sex couple to get married will not effect the marriages of the rest of us. Our marriages are much more effected by the actions of the more numerous fellow Hetero's
Anominus Wrote: Nov 26, 2012 11:25 AM
If you change the definition of something to the point where it is no longer recognizeable in its original form or function, that would be considered "destroyed." Actually, the redefinition of marriage to suit one behavior opens up the institution to further changes to suit the behaviors of others, so yes, homosexuals are intent on destroying marriage.

The only reason we can say that they "are not" currently doing so is because we have successfully denied them access to marriage. Opening marriage to them will also place marriage within eventual reach of practitioners of any other paraphilia imaginable.
Paulus Textor Wrote: Nov 26, 2012 11:17 AM
The point is that gay people are not destroying heterosexual marriage; heterosexuals are.

Gay people should have (and arguably, already DO have) the same right to enter into marriage contracts as straight people. Now, if using the term "marriage" really upset you, then don't use the term. Call it "Civil Union" or "Household Contract." It really doesn't matter.

On the other hand, if a gay couple wants to refer to their civil contract as a "marriage," so what? You are free to disagree with them, and they are free to disagree with you.

One significant development in the recent election was votes in four states approving same sex marriage initiatives. Until now, all previous state referenda to approve same sex marriage – 32 of them - failed.

The Wall Street Journal editorial page – a place where conservatives usually turn for intellectual capital – saw this as cause for celebration.

According to the Journal, marriage definition should come from voters, not from court orders. Americans, they argue, have “shown themselves more than capable of changing their views on gay marriage the democratic way.”

In other words, our definition of marriage should follow process, not...