Archive for the ‘Marriage’ Category

The backwards thinking of “regressives”

September 13, 2015

Marriages were originally IMPLICIT contracts between two parties, and often withh the families engaged. Most were common law marriages, they just moved in together, the aspirant having had the okay of the father. (Fathers know guys better than the daughters do, at least back in those days).

The fact of the matter is, the natural nuclear family (husband, wife, children) is the institution that cultivates the strongest protection against state oppression. That went out the window with the push for state indoctrination of the next generations disguised as “free” academic education and then “forced” induction into the indoctrination centers.

The other institution that cultivates protection against meek pushover subservience to oppressors’ memes are religious institutions, this according to prominent agnostic economist and libertarian writer Murray Rothbard and atheist economist Walter Block.

No wonder Karl Marx wrote in the Communist Manifesto that they had to exterminate the “bourgeois” institution of marriage and family. Total devotion to the collectivist mentality of worker ants is their goal.  The lying viper never wanted a “workers’ paradise”, he wanted his own special groups to dictate.

The modern heirs of Malthus and Marx think there are too many poor people in the world. That’s why they want to “protect” us from bad people, push groupthink, collectivist mentality. They think like the Orwellian uppermost crust of the “Inner Party”, like the Animal Farm where everyone has to be EQUAL but SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS.

So they push Groupthink disguised as “diversity”;

Inequality disguised as “equality”;

Unemployment disguised as “minimum wage”, now morphed to “living wage”;

Racism and racial preferences disguised as “anti-racism”, “affirmative action”,

Censorship and enforcement of group-think disguised as “equality” under the law;

Bullying libertarians, whistleblowers, pro-lifers and those of religious faith, and those who think differently under the guise of “equality” as a meaningless rant and “non-discrimination”,

Violating religious liberty under the guise of claiming to defend it;

And generally wearing sheepskin while inside they are “ravenous wolves”.

 

Madonna’s openly gay brother defends Kim Davis’ rights

September 7, 2015

The new thoughtcrime regime drew a line in the sand. Two thirds of Kentucky’s voters recently passed a constitutional amendment to incorporate into law what has been understood for marriage licenses for since there were any marriage licenses. Marriage a union of man and woman according to the understanding of the Framers at the time, as one of those “self-evident” truths they referred to in the Declaration of Independence.

At this next URL, an atheist defends Kim Davis:

http://christophercantwell.com/2015/09/05/the-religious-persecution-of-kim-davis/#more-6877

And here’s a report on Madonna’s openly gay brother defending Kim Davis and blasting the militant gays for their “sore winning”:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/madonna-openly-gay-brother-defends-ky-clerk-kim-davis-article-1.2350959

I agree with Chris Cantrell above, this is all about control. Centralizing government command-and-control obedience. Punishing thoughtcrime. They’re showing their hand with this. They had to use something to consolidate the Gramschi strategy for socialist tyranny.

(See this link for an explanation of the Gramsci strategy: http://www.wnd.com/2000/09/103/.)

See 2 Samuel 15 and Daniel 11 for examples of the strategies used by socialists today,  one by an ancient power-hungry operator and another a prophecy of the times we are living in.

 

United Nations poll: Example of Orwellian Newspeak

August 16, 2015

The New American website wrote about the United Nations poll of some 7 million people where they chose the issues they most cared about:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/21410-halfway-to-hell-public-places-global-warming-dead-last

Here is the list, with their top concerns listed first. Note that “action on climate change” is dead last.

A good education
Better healthcare
Better job opportunities
An honest and responsive government
Affordable and nutritious food
Protection against crime and violence
Access to clean water and sanitation
Support for people who can’t work
Better transport and roads
Reliable energy at home
Equality between men and women
Political freedoms
Freedom from discrimination and persecution
Protecting forests, rivers, and oceans
Phone and Internet Access
Action taken on climate change (Emphasis added.)

There is almost no doubt that the surveyed were given a list to pick from, and “Less government” and “more individual freedom” and “economic freedom” and “respect for private property” and “terminating the United Nations” were NOT on the list.

One of the comments below by a “Frank M. Petelson”, notes that high on the list, and most of the list, are socialist and collectivist concerns:

Of the people polled, most gave socialistic concerns. I wonder how few polled people wanted: Less Government, More Responsibility, and, with God’s help, a better world?

That’s a good question but from my view it’s like this, I said:

There is almost no doubt that the surveyed were given a list to pick from, and “Less government” and “more individual freedom” and “economic freedom” and “respect for private property” and “terminating the United Nations” were NOT on the list.

These opinion and cultural engineers, commissioned by the autocrats’ cabal, would never offer individual freedom, or more free markets, as an option. Political freedom is on the list but by that they have their meanings implicitly buried in the devil’s details, including the political freedom to force a non-conformist to conform. Like the political freedom to force a Christian couple bakery to serve up a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage. That’s their definition.

Or like the “freedom” to tell the world that Honduras pushing back against a socialist “coup by fraud” in 2009 is somehow a “coup” itself.

“Political freedom” is on the list, but “economic freedom” is not.

 

50 Reasons I’m Thankful for my Husband

March 9, 2015

follow the light

wedding

 50 Reasons I’m Thankful for my Husband 

Eighteen years ago I said “I do” to the most wonderful man I have ever met. I would do it all over again. We’ve had our share of ups and downs, joys and heart breaks, but our love and faith in God has sustained us. Today, I thought I would let you know why I love my husband so much. I pray blessings on your marriage, as you read about mine.

  1. I’m grateful he shares my faith in Jesus Christ.
  2. I am grateful to have a teammate as we face the challenges of life together.
  3. And reminisce over the life we have built together.
  4. I’m grateful he chose me to be his wife.
  5. I’m grateful he is an excellent father.
  6. And provider.
  7. And comforter.
  8. I’m grateful he’s good at things I’m not, like fixing computers and knowing what to do with…

View original post 372 more words

Is the Non-Aggression Principle enough?

March 28, 2014

I haven’t read Hoppe (one of these days I will) but “follow the NAP” is truly not enough to resolve what we all know is “right”.

The NAP is basically just a minimum starting point and minimum requirement for an “ethical guideline” for interaction with others. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” is a better rule in my opinion. But that requires some active charity in some situations.

No one has the right to force others to do his bidding. We all prefer to do everything voluntarily. Ask a left-fascist (aka “social justice liberal”) to give HIS OWN money.

Another NAP gap is children. Walter Block did a great job of applying the NAP “ruthlessly” to its logical conclusion to come up with “evictionism”, but that falls short of what we all know is the minimum required for a minimal ethical baseline.

By the act of having sex, you take the “risk” of having the blessing (as I call it) of the appearance of a new individual. But as that individual is conceived helpless outside the womb until “viability”, and helpless outside the womb too after birth, the mother AND father have an obligation to that new life with all its implications until he is able to fend for himself.

That obligation can be fulfilled of course by finding adoptive parents that will take care of that child and rear him reasonably well, but one of the basic tenets of libertarian (and anarchist) philosophy is that each one of us must take responsibility for our own actions. The principle of restitution can teach us here that if our act results in the conception of a helpless new person, we owe that new person to care for it.

That principle would not apply strictly to cases of rape, but applies to some 98% of pregnancies. However, even in cases of rape, where it is not the result of a mother’s own action, in the case of an infant, there is still a forcing of harm on that infant (both before and after birth) if the parents neglect the proper care.

However, I still oppose any extraordinary measures to seek out and punish parents for abortions. In this case, cultural shame would be the most effective strategy.

Even more effective is a strong Christian influence, as this has made slavery a dirty word around the world today, along with gladiator battles, extreme baby abuse, and so on.

// <![CDATA[
function DOMContentLoaded(browserID, tabId, isTop, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) { object.DOMContentLoaded(browserID, tabId, isTop, url);} };
function Nav(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, isBool, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) object.Nav(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, isBool, url); };
function NavigateComplete(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) object.NavigateComplete(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, url); }
function Submit(browserID, tabID, target, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) object.Submit(browserID, tabID, target, url); };

// ]]>

Some Encouraging Contrasts by Butler Shaffer

May 3, 2013
Gallery ~ The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet

Gallery ~ The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet (Photo credit: erjkprunczýk)

http://lewrockwell.com/shaffer/shaffer270.html

Hurray. Good article… Society misses the children..

In my opinion the forced march toward feminism covered the separation of women from the nuclear family. The nuclear family —husband and wife and children– is in my opinion, the best bulwark against state control and long-lasting tyranny.

It was a basic point in Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto platform, a platform I once rallied for in college days.

Now we get women “liberated” from pregnancy worries by both the pill and abortion. We get women shipped off in the military from their babies. We already got the divorce of children from marriage a long time ago with all the Hollywood romantic movies, family caricatures like “Married With Children“, and now ridicule of the very idea of an Ozzie and Harriet family.

The whole idea is to separate children from their parents and dissolve the natural, nuclear family, so the state can control the next generation, that is, the ruling class state, greedy for power.

Michelle Shocked – Yes God is Real – michelleshocked.com – YouTube

April 28, 2013
Cover of the Communist Manifesto’s initial pub...

Cover of the Communist Manifesto’s initial publication in February 1848 in London. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJq11taAJgY

 

..just sharing…

 

But in an interview later, she backed off earlier comments because she was inundated by accusations of hate when she shared that members of her church were afraid for the country because of the lifting up of homosexual marriage in the nation. She was subjected to so much hate speech that she sort of recanted.

 

But take note. I heard the video (or audio) of the first comment that caused the firestorm. They were mild and did not carry the weight of conviction or authority.

 

The flood of hate that awaits anyone who has anything positive about the natural nuclear family as even an ideal, means that anyone who is going to make such a statement should know what he is talking about, know his subject, and have the firm conviction of being right.

 

Christians need to remember we are sinners and it’s not even just the soul of our nation that concerns us, but the harm that homosexual behaviors invite by the behavior, a vector for unwelcome effects. And the children of the next generation. Every child has a father and a mother who have a responsibility and obligation to the child. And every relevant study shows that by almost any measure, a child is best protected and cultivated if he has the benefit of a father and a mother who raise him together.

 

The attack on the institution of marriage got full steam ahead with Karl Marx in his Communist Manifesto. The promotion of homosexual practices, with the demands for official same-sex marriage, abortion, these things were politicized in the 19th and 20th century by secularist leaders who of a truth are fighting marriage itself. This is something they are starting to feel safe now in saying out loud for an audience.

 

Karl Marx’ intent was to dissolve it. He called it a “bourgeouis” thing, although in fact it is a universal thing. Karl Marx had his own (neglected) wife and his children came to sorry ends, in fact. The real purpose is to make future generations safe for tyranny. They do this by having the state claim ownership of the children.

(By the way, the Kremlin has a bunch of writings by Karl Marx that are still kept hidden away in secret. What kind of dark stuff is it, you ask? We do too.)

 

Jesus loves the little children. God is love, and Jesus is his love manifest to us. If anybody “owns” the children, it’s God, regardless who has the blessings of raising them.

 

 

 

 

 

Homeschool parents have 1 shot to see son again

April 22, 2013
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011 film)

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011 film) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/homeschool-parents-have-1-shot-to-see-son-again/?cat_orig=education

This family needs international support to keep their son.

The Swedish authorities have been brutal against the rights of the family to keep their child, based only on their home-schooling decision, despite testimony from numerous friends and neighbors they are a good family and the decision of a lower court in the family’s favor.

The child was taken from them even as they boarded an aircraft to go to the mother’s home country of India. Their Social Services, the agency that was portrayed as criminally negligent in the novel by Stieg Larsson, in his so-called “Millennium Trilogy“, the most famous being “The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo“.

They are certainly living down to the horrendous performance of the treatment of the girl in those novels.

Of course Stieg Larsson was also wrong, wrong, WRONG, in his perverted portrayal of Nazil history. The Nazis, especially the Hitler kind, despised Christianity and hated the Bible. His fictitious evil socialist (“national socialist”) based crimes on verses.

Of course the crimes they committed were worse than the perversions portrayed, weren’t they, and he did not bring in the question of whether these people actually did it.

 

The Natural Family and “77 Non-Religious Reasons”

April 6, 2013

Do Cochran’s blog inspired a reaction:
http://gregoryccochran.com/2013/01/04/77-non-religious-reasons-to-support-traditional-marriage/

His blog was a reaction to the Ruth Institute’s list of “77 Non-religious Reasons to Support Man/Woman Marriage”:

One of the loudest advocates of same-sex marriage claims discrimination based on, so he says, 10,000 specific benefits that man-woman marriages get. Usually unspoken is the fact that those are *government-granted* “benefits. Why should *any* of us think government should give us permission to get married or to warp the land of marriage culture with it?

Marriage was always considered, including in pagan societies throughout history, as part of a natural family.

Same-sex marriage advocates always come back with this bogus “what is a family” anymore, and point at “non-traditional” families like mixed marriages (step-children all around, all that) as if the Ozzie and Harriet “ideal” is dead. That was even a Hillary Clinton reference circa 1992! But it’s not dead, she and other opponents of the NATURAL FAMILY, they just want to kill it.

Remind them that the supposedly new “non-traditional” families that *seem* successful are the ones that best emulate the *natural* family. Their own studies even show that the best adjusted kids are those that grew up in natural families, with a father and a mother. The worst thing that happened to especially the poor in America (not just black families) was the breakup of so many families.

It was in the Karl MarxCommunist Manifesto” after all. The main purpose behind this same-sex marriage noise is to push the idea that the children of any natural marriage belong to the state. The Powers That Be that have pushed almost the entire platform of the Communist Manifesto down our throats little by little and largely unnoticed, they HATE the natural family because it interferes with their indoctrination of the little ones.

Hillary Clinton once wrote a paper in college that denounced marriage as slavery. Some sharp reporter ought to ask her if she still believes that. (She’ll have to “kind of” renounce it, wink wink). I was a Communist youth myself, but facts, logic, truth have dragged me to where I am now. Marxists might call it slavery on a bad day, but they see no slavery in the fact that we are *forced* to labor for whoever commands the government du jour, for more than a third of our year, for them to decide who gets to have what.

So they are using the fact that Christians and others accepted the state taking over control of marriage as quite the Trojan Horse to try a Newspeak Dictionary tactic of making people forget the purpose of natural marriage, which has always been rearing children with the natural protection of the natural nuclear family of man, woman, and offspring.

Getting government back out of the business of controlling our lives by controlling marriage, and other collectivist ideas, is not an easy path, since state recognition has become in our minds apparently the definition of “legitimacy”.

Where Christian leaders have erred greatly was in using, or accepting, government license (control) over our lives in the first place. Mandating alcohol abstinence did not work at all, and other enforcement by the force of the gun of the law of religious doctrines will not work, other than for the protection of natural rights, life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and yes, property (Thou shalt not steal).

Ron Paul’s Huge Impact on the Political Conversation

March 23, 2013
The Federal Reserve: The Biggest Scam In History

The Federal Reserve: The Biggest Scam In History (Photo credit: CityGypsy11)

Have you noticed that Ron Paul‘s presidential campaigns has caused a change in the political conversation starting with the 2008 USA presidential campaign? The effects will be felt for a long time.

FEDERAL RESERVE BANK“, SO-CALLED

First of all, one of the biggest things is that the “Federal Reserve Bank”, so-called, the private banking cartel that acts as the broker between the banks and manages a total “legal” monopoly over the nation’s currency, fixes the prices in interest rates for lending, and manipulates the economy through manipulation of the money supply. I put “legal” in quotes because the whole setup is unconstitutional.

“Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the Eternal God, I will rout you out.”

I just found a web page (here) that presents the reasons for Andrew Jackson’s veto that killed the central bank, “penned by George Bancroft” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Bancroft):


The veto penned by George Bancroft outlined key points
which draw parallels to Americas present day scenario:
– It concentrated the nation’s financial strength in a single institution.
– It exposed the government to control by foreign interests.
– It served mainly to make the rich richer.
– It exercised too much control over members of Congress.
– Banks are controlled by a few select families.
– Banks have a long history of instigating wars between nations,
forcing them to borrow funding to pay for them.

First, one lesson from Ron Paul’s education campaign that is big but went somewhat unnoticed: His character and history exposed the dark underbelly of “opposition research”. This is the industry that specializes in uncovering things that will hurt a political opponent’s prospects. We saw this when they tried to smear him as a racist, and the only result of that was that everybody in the country learned that if anybody in political office has never been a racist, it is Ron Paul, and that the misinformation agents were very dirty indeed, if not racists themselves, for trying to smear a genuine unbiased gentleman. Besides, the more they talked about it, the more the audience realized that it was only Ron Paul who would kill off one of the ongoing causes of de facto harm to minorities in the country today, the useless and violent drug wars.

Another change is that everybody in the nation is now talking about the Federal Reserve, and most of it is not nice. Sure, the Obsolete Press is still “respecting” it in its reporting, tip-toeing around its economic dictatorship by a clique of bankers, but there is now with the Internet a true alternative news media that often reports facts that under the old more controlled structures, would be almost unknown by most people.

In fact, criticizing the Federal Reserve is a common practice by some Congressmen and economists. Many of them get quite acerbic in their language. I only remember one lone voice in the Old Media that had some harsh language for the Fed, Bob Brinker with the Money Talk call-in radio program. When Greenspan began strangling the stock market and the economy with his repeated increases in the base interest rates in the year 2000, Bob Brinker expressed perplexity that this decision could even be considered, and pulled no punches in his (albeit understated) language.

But Ron Paul is the one who forced the issue of the Federal Reserve specifically, and fiat money generally, and their true nature, into the national political conversation and consciousness.

RON PAUL MADE PEACE POPULAR AGAIN

To the consternation of the military-industrial complex, Ron Paul frustrated the neocon war drum pundits by making it popular to oppose unnecessary wars. The conversation his campaign catalyzed resolved into the realization that America’s wars of recent decades were not only unconstitutional, but they were a “cure” that had far worse results than the “disease”.

Now, almost everybody, get this, especially on the “right”, is now expressing weariness and puzzlement over the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The “Arab Spring” misinformation cover propaganda for throwing north Africa overboard to a clique of oligarchs ruling as theocrats, ideological analogues of Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, so called. I say “so-called” because they will persecute other devout Muslims who disagree with them as fast as they would kill a “Crusader”. Make no mistake Muslims: Even if you are a member, you are under the same risk from your leaders as the rest of us. There are indeed many Muslims who are not the stereotype.

RON PAUL MADE THE WORLD SAFE FOR “SEQUESTER”

The gig is up, the secret is blown, the public now knows the fraud they use in Washington when they talk about “budget cuts”. Now Americans know they are NOT budget cuts at all, but INCREASES in the budget, in the way that Americans talk about their own personal budgets, and even corporations.

Now they know that when Congress and the President talk about budget cuts, they are LYING because they know that Americans don’t “talk like that”.

No, Americans know now that the Chicken Little squawking over the “sequester” is a great big ridiculous joke, meant as cover to do more dollar-destructive profligate increasing in the budge. And a lot of Republican congressmen are surely getting heat from their siblings and their cousins back home about it. The Republican half of the Establishment Parties was scared by the press into caving on the “government shutdown” in the 1990s but “sequester” is a different story now.

But by extending the debt limit out some more –yet again– they are exposing themselves. And even much of the alternative media did not make much noise about this. The Tea Party surge in 2010 when Americans spoke with a loud voice that they wanted the spending and the borrowing to STOP RIGHT NOW, there were four freshmen who gave in.

It seems like the Republicans are the biggest enemies to implementing their own rhetoric into law. The minimum price for raising the debt ceiling should have been at least the repeal of “Obamacare”. It has already caused great harm to Mom and Pop shops, small business, and the poor at the bottom of the wage scale has seen their pay and their hours reduced, and both health insurance costs and cost of medical services has gone up more than inflation, all harmful and opposite to the promise.

Hondurans stopped a dictatorship in its incipient stages in July 2009. They have more sense than Americans, and we call ourselves a “democracy” or even a “republic”? Who are you to talk about them? Corruption is pretty much a fact of life in Latin America, and corruption worked hand in hand with anti-corruption demagoguery to put de-facto “elected” dictators in place now in several countries in South America, but one little country said NO! to an “elected dictatorship” despite all the dollars the Chavistas poured into it.

RON PAUL EXPOSES THE WELFARE STATE

There are millions of people in the USA that get a monthly check or free food at the cost of divulging a thousand private secrets they would not tell a neighbor. But now people are much more aware of how this government intervention into people’s lives actually hurts the poor more.

Politicians for example raise taxes and borrow money to pay for a bureaucracy that gives out money (and “food stamps”) to people for the price of all their information. Some government fanatics now take a word out of the Orwellian Doublespeak dictionary and call it an increase in “revenues’. Never mind it never increases tax revenues as much as they say, because the economy is NOT zero-sum.

Say John Doe works at a low-wage job and his employer, Uncle Joe Creations, sees his taxes go up to pay for those people who have no jobs. So the Uncle Joe looks at how he can cut costs, and one of biggest expenses for business in the United States is payroll. He has to look at payroll.

If Joe has been a good businessman, he cannot cut back on infrastructure or on inventory to pay for the increase in taxes because it would decrease his own revenues. Sales would go down. Joe’s sales have been going down because the shrinking production in the economy has hurt business. That’s why the demand by government officials and “consultants” with six-figure and seven-figure salaries in Washington are demanding more “tax revenues” to “help the poor” [sic].

John Doe is maybe the janitor, say, so what “Uncle Joe” does is decide that he can use a part-time service at half of what he pays John Doe.

That’s how John Doe loses his job, the economy loses production at the margins of productivity, and now John Doe cannot buy the car he planned on, or the TV, and he has to cut back on everything while collecting unemployment. Not all is lost. The unemployment checks come from payments to the funds by people who are working, except now there is one fewer working.

So of course the bureaucrats (who started out as wanting to help the poor, and many still do) demand more from the tax base. Politicians have an easy out with debt increases, especially if it creates “currency” out of thin air. But that causes inflation, a euphemism for robbing value from your savings and your cash to pay for what they want.

YOUNGER FOLKS ARE ABANDONING THE SOCIALIST LIE

One of Ron Paul’s strongest showing in 2008 and 2012 was on college campuses. While other candidates had problems getting even one section of a stadium to look full, Ron Paul’s crowds packed stadiums and auditoriums across the country. They came often because of his opposition to unconstitutional and senseless wars, and many of those also cheered his message of killing corruption by kicking government out of the economy.

EVERYBODY IS A LIBERTARIAN NOW

It is now popular to call yourself a libertarian in politics, especially in the Republican Party, but in other venues as well. It has left the corner where the Rulers’ Media had it relegated as “crazy people” and set fire to kid’s imaginations and made it a popular cause to oppose the welfare-warfare state in the same sentence.

THE WAR ON DRUGS IS UNPOPULAR NOW EVEN AMONG PEOPLE WHO HATE MIND-ALTERING SUBSTANCES

Now the body politic is questioning the cost in lives and resources of the so-called war on drugs. They are getting the message that the war on drugs is worse overall than the drugs themselves, and that Prohibition Round Two is not working. Oh, and by the way, it’s not even constitutional like Prohibition One was.

MARRIAGE

An important and largely unnoticed percentage of BIble-believing Christians –like me– have always disdained the idea that the state would have anything to do with marriage, but the issue of so-called “same-sex marriage” has driven this idea into the open to libertarians, who now want the state to bug out of the marriage altogether.

Why should we allow the state to issue “licenses” to marry?

It’s not that I think “gays” should “be allowed” to marry. I was married for awhile before I had to get state recognition for it so I could get the visa that allowed my wife to come to the States. One “same-sex marriage” advocate that wants government permission for this has defended this by saying there are some 10,000 legal privileges “enjoyed” by heterosexual couples in the USA that “gays” should be able to benefit from.

First of all, if you concede your government the say-so, the last word on the matter, then you open it up for your opponents. If you advocate same-sex marriage and demand the privilege from political power, then you are making it a legitimate issue for those who oppose you.

“One size fits all” dilutes your own cause. I tell my close family and friends that I think homosexual practices are harmful to them in many ways that are independent of morality claims. The practice has been common throughout history –variety of expressions of hedonism has never lacked in most societies. But even in cultures where it was common, never did they consider male coupling as a “marriage”.

But I don’t think anybody, whether they represent a “government” or not, should be able to dictate who I can be with, and I would rather persuade others than use force on them.

Even so, I will mention here that one of the best defenses against a state that imposes cookie-cutter conformity on its citizens is the natural family, mother and father raising their children. Talkers in media talk about non-traditional “kinds of families”, but what they avoid talking about is the fact that all these different “kinds” of families outside the traditional model, are all take-offs from the natural family of father, mother, and children.

SCHOOL CHOICE

The idea that parents should make the decisions about their children’s education is every day more popular. The idea has breached a threshold: most “minority” parents want vouchers for their kids. A government monopoly is now ever more unpopular.

FREEDOM RINGS

What did God say about people wanting a king? What did God warn them about taxes and war?

1 Samuel 8:7 7 And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
11 And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.

12 And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.

13 And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.

14 And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.

15 And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.

16 And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.

17 He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.

18 And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the Lord will not hear you in that day.

19 Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us;

20 That we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.

Isaiah 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;