Amazing, eh?
I’ve had it in for this guy since he forced us to rename our airport to “Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.” I’d love to force his local airport to be renamed “William Clinton Hartsfield International Airport.”
Anyway. This guy was also responsible for the odious “Defense” of Marriage Act, and today he defended his defense in a Washington Post opinion piece, saying that a constitutional amendment was not necessary to prevent gay marriage – it should be up to the states.
Then, at the very end of the column, came this wise insight, one that I wish more right wingers had:
I worry, as do supporters of the constitutional amendment on marriage, that a nihilistic amorality is holding ever greater sway in the United States, especially among the young. Similarly, I agree that the kernel of basic morality in America — the two-parent nuclear family — has eroded under the influence of the “me” generation, which has left us with an astronomical divorce rate and a tragic number of hurting families across the country.
Restoring stability to these families is a tough problem, and requires careful, thoughtful and, yes, tough solutions. But homosexual couples seeking to marry did not cause this problem, and the Federal Marriage Amendment cannot be the solution. (Emphasis added)
Of course, Bob Barr does not support same-sex marriage, which I believe can only strengthen the notion of family, love, and stability — the antithesis of the “me” generation he speaks of. But, at least he points out that the problems in American marriage are not because same-sex couples seek that equal treatment. Logic, at last.
I would like people to stop balming the bibile and church making decisions about gay marriages wake up. The facts is that we have male and female and the female is the ones who bares children with a male to populate the world. If it was meant for same sex marriages then anyone could concieve a child but this is not the way the body is made. Science can explain why it takes a man and a women to make a marriage. The same way it takes a man and a women to make a child. I am tired of people stating the bible is only for certain people and that marriages should only be dicussed in church. Take a big look at our population and think how and where all the people came from. It can only happen with the opposite sex. Our bodies were made for these reason I will always say marriage is between a man and a woman. I believe in Jesus Christ,the church and the bible which do state that a marriage is between a man and a women but take a look deeper and the answer is right there. We grow to too concieve children when eggs are fertilized by a man. the same sex can not do this so it is not right.
Hmm. I wish people would stop balming the bibile, too. It’s getting slippery.
Your argument, aside from being difficult to figure out grammatically, doesn’t take fact into account. It’s true that two different sexes are required to procreate. But this is a biological fact that has absolutely nothing to do with marriage. Marriage is a contract between two people that was created by man and society as a whole. It’s not something that is a biological imperative, and there’s nothing scientific about marriage. The human race is completely capable of reproducing without marriage.
The idea that marriage is required to have a child is ridiculous. That’s a moral judgement, not a scientific one. If you can somehow get the weak minded to realize that “marriage” is a concept created by man and not a natural imperative, the entire argument falls apart.
It’s sad that every argument advanced by the religious right against same sex marriage and for traditional marriage, from procreation to government benefits, seems to omit the one most important ingredient in marriage: two people in love.
Since marraige is between a man and a woman, two men or two women cannot wed.