The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: Are any of you as sick of the leftist media...

  1. #11
    Senior Member Uncle Bill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Rapid City, SD
    Posts
    4,289

    Default

    I wanted to reply to Matt's post, but couldn't put my thoughts on this subject into a reasonably convincing arguement that the current SSM debate isn't about a live and let live philosophy. It's way more devious a far reaching. This article by a much better wordsmith than I'll ever be, might give you a little more insight.

    UB

    Yes, Let’s Keep Government Out of Marriage

    By: Erick Erickson (Diary) | April 1st, 2013




    Last week at RedState, we spent a lot of time focusing on politics from a faith perspective because it was Holy Week. Throughout the week, many people who support gay marriage lambasted me and others that Christians were just trying to use government to legislate marriage or morality.


    But I agree that we should keep the government out of marriage.


    Last I checked, George and Martha Washington did not get remarried after 1776 when the United States declared independence from Great Britain. Nor did they do so after 1789, when the constitution was enacted.


    In fact, not one of the founding fathers married prior to 1776 remarried the same person after the United States was formed.


    Government did not create marriage. The only laws on the books related to marriage are state laws and federal laws that recognize the marriage structure that previously existed before the government established them.


    To be sure, over time those marriages evolved. The age of consent and the ability to contract have changed and impacted marriage, but the structure and operation of marriage were still the same.


    The most significant changes in the law regarding marriage have been on how to end a marriage, not how to begin a marriage or what constitutes a marriage.
    But marriage pre-existed the state and has evolved institutionally over a few thousand years.


    What’s happening now is that gay marriage advocates are attempting to use the state to change marriage. When they say Christians are trying to use the state to legislate their version of marriage, they are full of crap. All Christians are doing is defending an institution that already exists from being changed to something it has never been.


    It is the gay marriage advocates who want to force, by the power of the state, a pre-existing institution to change. If the state has the power to change the definition of an institution that it did not create, the state can force everyone to do so. It is already happening in this country at the state level.


    Marriage may evolve to include gays one day. But the time is not there year. The laws enacted across the country to preserve the status quo are just that — there to keep the state, via the courts or legislature from changing an institution neither the courts nor legislatures of the several states created, but chose to recognize.


    Let’s be clear here — you can support gay marriage, but don’t tell me Christians are trying to legislate their version of marriage. The only people trying to legislate, from the bench or otherwise, are gay rights advocates who refuse to let the institution naturally evolve because of their own impatience for the trappings of normalcy in a society that has long viewed them as outside the mainstream.


    That the loudest proponents of gay marriage cannot even be honest in what’s going on loudly suggests they are not being honest when they say they’re cool with conscientious objectors to the whole idea. Consider, for example, this blog post from the Cato Institute entitled, “We Support Gay Marriage but Oppose Forcing People to Support It.”


    They filed an amicus brief in support of Elane Photography, which was punished in New Mexico for refusing to help a gay wedding. Cato bases its defense on photography being protected by the first amendment. But note this:


    Our brief explains that photography is an art form protected by the First Amendment because clients seek out the photographer’s method of staging, posing, lighting, and editing. Photography is thus a form of expression subject to the First Amendment’s protection, unlike many other wedding-related businesses (e.g., caterers, hotels, limousine drivers).

    So if you are a Christian caterer, bed and breakfast, etc. too bad. You will be forced to provide services to a gay wedding. You will be made to by the power of the state. That’s where we are headed. If the state has the power to change the definition of an institution it did not create, the state can compel your services to that institution.


    So yes, let’s keep the government out of marriage. Its definition will change over time through the natural evolution of all institutions. That evolution may include gay marriage, but it might not.
    When the one you love becomes a memory, that memory becomes a treasure.

  2. #12
    Senior Member Uncle Bill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Rapid City, SD
    Posts
    4,289

    Default

    This is another follow up, primarily for Matt. I want to apologize for not first finding out if Matt is a Christian, because this is all moot for those that find no comfort in believing Christ is Lord. But this short article by the editor of Redstate ...Eric Ericson, is also of prime omportance for those that want to be left alone, and just don't care about how this all turns out. Please understand this side of the debate, and the ramifications of 'not' caring.

    UB

    Some, though, are going the next step....
    I. Do. Not. Care.

    The left will allow no fence sitting. You may not believe me. You may think me hyperbolic. But the history of the world shows this. Events ultimately come to a head. They boil to their essence. And at that point you must choose.


    That is why so many Christians are fighting. Because we see in Europe and Canada what will happen here. Christianity is a religion of the city square. Christ compels us to "go forth and teach." It is the Great Commission. We cannot go forth and teach when the left bars us from the town square.


    Many people say we should have legal gay marriage, but not have religious gay marriage.


    The left will not honor the distinction. Look to Canada. Preachers can be brought up for hate crimes charges merely for discussing passages of the Bible that deal with same sex sexual relations. You may not care that it is a sin, but the world surely does.


    Look at Louie Giglio, who could not honor the President at his inauguration because of his orthodox Christian beliefs on this subject.


    In short, you may choose not to care and in so doing sit on the sidelines or give aid and comfort to the open minded and tolerant who want gay marriage so everyone can have equal rights.


    But the world will one day make you care. Your church, should it open its doors to all, but refuse to perform a same sex wedding, will be accused of discrimination. In some places, the church will be forced to stop performing weddings. Many churches will lose their tax exempt status. The costs of sharing the gospel will go up.


    Already Christians are being harassed by fellow American citizens for not wanting to participate in a gay marriage.
    The time will come, more quickly than you can imagine, when you will be made to care.


    We are not using the state to enforce the commands of Scripture.


    We are using the state to protect our ability to preach the scripture under the first amendment. If the state has the power to change the definition of an institution that it did not create, but that God himself created, the state can compel and coerce the church to honor that definition or sit on the sidelines.


    A Christian on the sidelines is a Christian not going forth.


    You can be a sincere Christian and support the idea of gay marriage. But you would also be foolish to ignore what is going to happen to the church once the state decides something is a matter of equal protection. You can dismiss me now, but you are ignoring what’s already happening.


    Keep in mind as well that many of those who you may look to for reassurance that I’m wrong, are hostile to the church already and will not be on the side of the church as the equal protection arguments against it grow.


    The state did not create marriage and it should not now exert the power to change the definition of that which it did not create.


    Those of you who are Christians who support gay marriage will one day have Archbishop Chaput burning in your ears. He said that evil peddles tolerance until it is dominant then seeks to silence good. That’s why Christians fight on this issue. It is not to force themselves on others, but to protect themselves from others being forced on them.
    When the one you love becomes a memory, that memory becomes a treasure.

  3. #13
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntClub View Post
    The government should have no postition or part of this, and the SCOTUS is part of the government.......the only tie to government this issue has is tax and health insurance. Take away any ramifications marriage has on taxes, as it should be and there goes one part of the equation. And make employers responsible for the other part. It's insantity that everything big and small that has nothing to do with the governace of this country is constantly dominating politics.
    Very important point!

    If we look more closely at the tax stuff, we can find that married couples are not necessarily getting a "benefit". Two small incomes for single persons could stay in a lower tax bracket than when the incomes are combined through a joint return. There are the tax benefits related to children, like a child-care deduction. However, that could just as easily be taken care of with a deduction for a dependent under 18, as is the case for single parents. As luvmylabs states, there are some times when NOT being married could make more sense financially. This would also apply to senior citizens who could benefit by living together & collecting two SS checks instead of one, and simply use their wills to take care of their affairs after their deaths.

    Not to mention that if gay marriage becomes commonplace, soon enough these couples will also learn about gay divorce Read about a case where a lesbian couple, who were to divorce, had a 3rd party involved in the child custody dispute ... the sperm donor for their child. Sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for! Gay marriage may still be too new to predict whether such marriages will be any less prone to divorce than heterosexual marriages.

    Is anyone else getting tired of hearing daily about this issue? There are so many more important things that need our attention. Too bad the media didn't give as much attention to Benghazi.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  4. #14
    Senior Member road kill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Berlin, WI
    Posts
    10,654

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerry Clinchy View Post
    Very important point!

    If we look more closely at the tax stuff, we can find that married couples are not necessarily getting a "benefit". Two small incomes for single persons could stay in a lower tax bracket than when the incomes are combined through a joint return. There are the tax benefits related to children, like a child-care deduction. However, that could just as easily be taken care of with a deduction for a dependent under 18, as is the case for single parents. As luvmylabs states, there are some times when NOT being married could make more sense financially. This would also apply to senior citizens who could benefit by living together & collecting two SS checks instead of one, and simply use their wills to take care of their affairs after their deaths.

    Not to mention that if gay marriage becomes commonplace, soon enough these couples will also learn about gay divorce Read about a case where a lesbian couple, who were to divorce, had a 3rd party involved in the child custody dispute ... the sperm donor for their child. Sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for! Gay marriage may still be too new to predict whether such marriages will be any less prone to divorce than heterosexual marriages.

    Is anyone else getting tired of hearing daily about this issue? There are so many more important things that need our attention. Too bad the media didn't give as much attention to Benghazi.
    This is why we hear about it daily.
    This administration wants no one to to pay attention to the man behind the curtain!
    Stan b & Elvis

  5. #15
    Senior Member swampcollielover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    MO
    Posts
    1,716

    Default

    We cannot change the way these people think or act. We can break the backs of the media and politicians that support them. CAN YOU SAY BOYCOTT, capture the names of advertisers that promote these articles, news shows, news papers, etc. Then go after those companies, write letters, make calls, use the internet, facebook, etc. BOYCOTT THESE COMPANIES, DO NOT USE THEIR PRODUCTS OR SERVICES AND CAMPAIGN AGAINST THEM PUBLICALLY. If enough of us do this, we can break them down....it is the money that drives the Liberal train....!

  6. #16
    Senior Member Wade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swampcollielover View Post
    If enough of us do this, we can break them down....it is the money that drives the Liberal train....!
    And the conservative train, along with the Democratic train, as well as the Republican train. Basically, MONEY drives the bus here in America, period!!!!
    I hate rude behavior in a man, won't tolerate it. Captain Woodrow Call

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •