Say Anything Blog

It was the right decision to be sure, but “Canada” and “limited government” don’t belong in the same sentence.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

So, they are intruding into the bedrooms of the vast majority of the population who is not gay, and making their marriages less than they were previously.  Nice going!

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

So, they are intruding into the bedrooms of the vast majority of the population who is not gay, and making their marriages less than they were previously.

I don’t see how that’s true.  I certainly won’t consider my coming marriage (Dec. 30th!) to be lessened if the government allowed homosexual marriage.  Or let people marry goats or whatever.

My relationship is my relationship, and it isn’t defined by what other people do in their relationships.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Or let people marry goats or whatever.

Rob: Don’t give the libs any ideas…

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

Heh…

I’ll try not to.

My point was just to say that you marring another man, or a goat or a space alien, really doesn’t do anything to my relationship with my soon-to-be wife one way or another.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Rob: Marriage has certain requirements, like being a college professor, for instance, unlike a real “civil right” which is open to all, without requirement.
If we decided that being a college professor was a “civil right”, and conferred it on anyone who wanted to be one, without requirement(or with lower requirements), we would be discounting all previous college professors overnight. 
The institution of marriage would be altered by so-called “gay marriage”.  I think you can understand that.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

My point was just to say that you marring another man, or a goat or a space alien, really doesn’t do anything to my relationship with my soon-to-be wife one way or another.

That may be true, Rob, but that is beside the point of arbitrarily changing the definition of marriage to suit a small special interest group.  There are literally billions of people worldwide who are participating in the institution of marriage, not to mention the billions throughout the history of the human race who have invested themselves and their societies in this institution.  It is the fundamental building block of human society.  Don’t you think it might be prudent for that small group to demonstrate how the rest of us might benefit from this change, and then let us choose whether we want to take that step or not?  Don’t you find it interesting that they are not doing that? Instead, they attempt to guilt trip us because we aren’t giving them what they want, when they want it?  Is that the right attitude to be taking toward something that will change the basic fabric of human society?

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Robert, no need to read me the riot act.  I have no problem with gay marriage.  I will not support it through judicial fiat, but I support it coming about through a vote of the people.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Rob: No “riot act” intended. Doesn’t it bother you, though, that the “gay marriagists” aren’t trying to persuade the public over to their point of view with reasoned argument?  They are using a two-pronged approach of guilt-tripping and legislating from the bench, employing propaganda-type arguments about “civil rights”, as if they are somehow aligned with the Civil Rights movement of the Fifties and Sixties.  In other words, if gay marriage is so good, why not just say so, and give the compelling reasons?  Why do they have to lie about it?  You and I agree on the voting thing, but when I contemplate the results of the last election, which IMO was decided by MSM propaganda rather than the truth, I worry about our fundamental institutions.

I’ll be posting on the reader blogs tomorrow about the larger issue here, which is about the causes behind this “minority rule” movement.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

my coming marriage (Dec. 30th!)

Congratulations Rob! A marraige between Christmas and New Year’s! Wow. That’s a lot of food and booze in one week, let alone when one adds a marraige!

Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

What’s wrong with people marrying goats?

What’s wrong with people marrying goats?

Don’t worry Dave! We not intentionally impugning your parents!

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

I didn’t think you had any reasons.

Dave_C
what exactly are you getting at here? with the goat thing? i can see you recently saw the south park with the ‘PETA retreat’ in it.

Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

Sparkie: I think I heard him humming: “I know I’ll never find another ewe.”

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

Marriage has historically and traditionally been between male and female.  It is a sacred institution to many cultures and religions.  The left often sites the antiquity of a culture or people as sacred.  Why not the same courtesy for the antiquity of the institution of marriage? 

Marriage is sacred to most Americans and these happen to represent the majority.  To accept ‘gay marriage’ is to force its acceptance upon the majority.  The majority will be considered discriminating bigots if they fail to acknowledge and live in the shadow of gay marriage laws.  Business and business owners will be required to extend the same benefits to gay partnerships as to married couples (can you imagine a man’s partner getting maternity leave with pay for six weeks when their artificially inseminated lesbian sister is having their baby, who herself will demand the same?).  Churches who refuse to recognize gay marriages will likely loose their tax exempt status for hate speech (like in Canada).  I can’t wait for the queer, hallmark anniversary cards. 

Bottom line, gay marriage is an assault on a sacred institution and highly offensive to most Americans.  It also is a reflection of the fleeting moral center of the people of a nation. If nature itself doesn’t teach the foolishness and shame of homosexuality nothing anyone says will likely convince anyone otherwise.

Why not the same courtesy for the antiquity of the institution of marriage?

Because they seek to destroy the fundamental fabric of American society.  They certainly can’t beat us in a straight-up fight.  Neither can the terrorists.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

MikeAdamson said, The late Pierre Elliott Trudeau once said that “the State has no business in the bedrooms of the nation”. The House of Commons has affirmed that view and once again fans of limited government can raise a toast and tip their hats to the eminently wise nation of Canada.

What the hell does this have to do with bedrooms and how is this a victory of “limited government”?

Ahh...nevermind on that second question Mike.

I thought about it and I came to realize that “one man, one woman” is now shortened to “two people”. There is the entirety of the “limited government” that you’re cheering on.

You’re still an unrepetant socialist though, so I don’t know why you believe you have cause to cheer.

Even the ChiComs were smart enough to know that before you can institute Marxism, the family structure must be destroyed.  There can be no competition for loyalty to the State, and people are loyal to their families before they are loyal to the State.  So-called “gay marriage” is one of the steps in the process of destroying the family-based fabric of our society, in that it changes the definition of the most basic social and cultural institution to one of individual emotional satisfaction, rather than a commitment to a greater goal of the continuation of family lines, not to mention the legitimization of offspring.  Otherwise, we are just a big commune, which is exactly what the Marxists want.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

I find it ironic that, when the Canadian govt decides to change the definition of marriage for the vast majority for the benefit of a very tiny minority, that is characterized as “Big Govt being beaten back”.
This sounds like Backwards World to me.
It’s more like “real married folks get beaten up by Big Govt”.  I don’t imagine that the people got to vote on this…

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.