Antonin Scalia's Gay Marriage Dissent

[MD_Vet]

http://www.businessinsider.com/anton...#ixzz2XKp5hQF0

[muggsy]

I don't argue court decisions, but I will say this. Gays aren't seeking equality they are seeking social acceptance of their sexual deviance. Equality could be achieved through civil unions. A marriage is a covenant between a man a woman and God. Homosexuals therefore cannot be married. They don't fit the criteria. And before someone tells me that people can be married outside of the Church please understand that that is a civil ceremony. My marriage was sanctioned by God. If love conquers all them why can't three men be married. If a woman's husband dies why can't she marry her son if the both love each other and don't plan to have children except through adoption. Life is complicated enough. The only ones who will benefit from gay marriage are the attorneys. If gay marriage is allowed why discriminate against those who believe in polygamy? If anyone can marry anyone why bother to have a marriage at all?

[yqtszhj]

If gay marriage is allowed why discriminate against those who believe in polygamy?

I can't imagine having to try and please 2 wives. It's hard enough to make one happy...

The wife gets frustrated with her friends. Imagine having to get along with another WIFE!!!

[muggsy]

I can't imagine having to try and please 2 wives. It's hard enough to make one happy...

The wife gets frustrated with her friends. Imagine having to get along with another WIFE!!!

You don't try to please a wife, yqtszhj, you just humor them. (Words to live by.)

[knkali]

I don't argue court decisions, but I will say this. Gays aren't seeking equality they are seeking social acceptance of their sexual deviance. Equality could be achieved through civil unions. A marriage is a covenant between a man a woman and God. Homosexuals therefore cannot be married. They don't fit the criteria. And before someone tells me that people can be married outside of the Church please understand that that is a civil ceremony. My marriage was sanctioned by God. If love conquers all them why can't three men be married. If a woman's husband dies why can't she marry her son if the both love each other and don't plan to have children except through adoption. Life is complicated enough. The only ones who will benefit from gay marriage are the attorneys. If gay marriage is allowed why discriminate against those who believe in polygamy? If anyone can marry anyone why bother to have a marriage at all?

How about this Mugs:
The gov doesn't belong in any marriage(as it once was) and never should be. This is a spiritual sacrament/covenant.

Also....I don't think gays give a sheet what you and I think about them. Instead, they are seeking the same benefits(read money) that the gov gives to heterosexual "unions" (social security survivor benefits, family leave, estate tax exemptions, ect.) If the gov got out of providing benefits for marriage, which ultimately denigrates something that used to be purely spiritual to just another business transaction, none of this would be happening. This is another example of government getting involved in things it was never designed to be in. This issue is firstly about money, and the moral, theological issues are completely different IMHO.

You are right. Iif they marry then they will divorce. Attorneys should welcome same sex marriage from a purely business perspective.

[LorenzoB]

Antonin Scalia's Gay Marriage Dissent

I agree, the government should be out of it completely, but it got in in the first place to encourage behavior that was best for society as a whole. Marriage (proper) helps to stabilize families. It helps young men mature and "grow up". Also, those families tend to purchase homes which creates responsibility (to pay loans) and further stabilizes the economy and also provides a vehicle to build equity (because most people don't save much). Marriage usually produces children which married couples (proper) invest in. They have a vested interest in that child growing up with a good education and becoming a "producer" in society. Then ultimately taking care of their elderly parents (requiring less tax money).

There are TONS of benefits to society (taxpayers) to strong families and children growing up with a sense of responsibility. Broken families, or people having children out of wedlock, or ultra leftists gay couples adopting children and teaching them that the government OWES them does not help society (tax payers) as a whole.

The government initially looked at this as an investment. And it was, but now it is just screwing things up like big government always does.

[knkali]

I agree, the government should be out of it completely, but it got in in the first place to encourage behavior that was best for society as a whole. Marriage (proper) helps to stabilize families.How is that? Divorce and broken families are at a record high. Money stabilizes families. It helps young men mature and "grow up". I would intuitively agree with this but not sure if it is realistic. Will need to see how children of homosexual couples grow up and become productive members of society or not. Also, those families tend to purchase homes which creates responsibility (to pay loans) and further stabilizes the economy and also provides a vehicle to build equity (because most people don't save much)This is about money and the ability to earn it. Fiscal responsibility is not a wedding vow nor is it a prerequisite to getting married . Marriage usually produces children which married couples (proper) invest in. They have a vested interest in that child growing up with a good education and becoming a "producer" in society. Then ultimately taking care of their elderly parents (requiring less tax money).Many hetero couples have children that should never have. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. Again, I need more data points on how productive children are of homosexual couples. There just hasn't been enough "unions" to track for long enough time.

There are TONS of benefits to society (taxpayers) to strong families and children growing up with a sense of responsibility. Broken families, or people having children out of wedlock, or ultra leftists gay couples adopting children and teaching them that the government OWES them does not help society (tax payers) as a whole. understood but there are many families that do not meet your conditions above that still have that entitlement mentality. Furthermore, one could argue that the welfare system and gov involvement in the minimum wage helps create this cycle of despair and that marriage of any flavor has no culpability in the destruction or preservation of the family unit.

The government initially looked at this as an investment. And it was, but now it is just screwing things up like big government always does. You clearly explained the business transaction aspect of why the government got into the marriage business in the first place. Thank you for that. My above comments were to show why that business paradigm doesn't ultimately work and by default strengthens the concept of marriage as a religious one primarily with some moral and ethical spillover which can possibly help create an environment conducive to building good citizens and consequently a compassionate and tolerant society. Ultimately the question is: does society control gov or is it visa versa.

did this color text thing work?

[codegeek]

Re: Antonin Scalia's Gay Marriage Dissent

Hahahaha it did! The government needs to stay out of the business of dividing us. If one or more adults want to enter into a contractual marriage, what business is it of ours?

Heterosexuals have been screwing up marriage for centuries. Let's invite gay people to the party so they can be miserable too.

[knkali]

Hahahaha it did! The government needs to stay out of the business of dividing us. If one or more adults want to enter into a contractual marriage, what business is it of ours?

Heterosexuals have been screwing up marriage for centuries. Let's invite gay people to the party so they can be miserable too.

that succinctly said a lot

[LorenzoB]

Antonin Scalia's Gay Marriage Dissent

knkali, the color thing worked great.

I believe the government should keep it's big nose out of most (if not all) of our business.

I was pointing out the government's initial goal was to encourage desirable behavior. Behavior that they believed would strengthen our nation. We don't need to argue what desirable behavior is now. Back then (when it was started) the general population knew exactly what it was and agreed that it would promote a stronger nation through many of the "byproducts" that would result from marriage.

Today more than ever, political powers (on both sides of the isle) favor short term political gain and generally don't look out for what's best for our country in the long run. I think many like to pretend otherwise, but you and I know they are faking it.

[LorenzoB]

Antonin Scalia's Gay Marriage Dissent

I also think you may have been a bit off target on some of my points, but because I am using tapatalk I can't reply with different colors.

One example: Marriage helps young men mature and "grow up". I meant the stupid young guy getting married! LOL! I knew I matured much faster after getting married. New responsibilities meant I needed to get my butt in gear! And then kids! Oh my God! Now it is really time to straighten up and be a real man for my family! Marriage... and then kids have been, for many generations and many societies around the world, the "real wake up call" to maturity for young men. ....... For the most part.

[knkali]

knkali, the color thing worked great.

I believe the government should keep it's big nose out of most (if not all) of our business.

I was pointing out the government's initial goal was to encourage desirable behavior. Behavior that they believed would strengthen our nation. We don't need to argue what desirable behavior is now. Back then (when it was started) the general population knew exactly what it was and agreed that it would promote a stronger nation through many of the "byproducts" that would result from marriage.

Today more than ever, political powers (on both sides of the isle) favor short term political gain and generally don't look out for what's best for our country in the long run. I think many like to pretend otherwise, but you and I know they are faking it.

Got it. I see where I was off.

[muggsy]

How about this Mugs:
The gov doesn't belong in any marriage(as it once was) and never should be. This is a spiritual sacrament/covenant.

Also....I don't think gays give a sheet what you and I think about them. Instead, they are seeking the same benefits(read money) that the gov gives to heterosexual "unions" (social security survivor benefits, family leave, estate tax exemptions, ect.) If the gov got out of providing benefits for marriage, which ultimately denigrates something that used to be purely spiritual to just another business transaction, none of this would be happening. This is another example of government getting involved in things it was never designed to be in. This issue is firstly about money, and the moral, theological issues are completely different IMHO.

You are right. Iif they marry then they will divorce. Attorneys should welcome same sex marriage from a purely business perspective.

If homosexuals weren't concerned about social acceptance they would be going for civil union status rather than marriage status. There is that little book called the Bible that stands in their way. Of course, if you take God out of the equation then anything goes, along with the country. Don't kid yourself social acceptance is key to their goals. If not the liberal media wouldn't keep quoting statistics on how many Americans now approve of homosexual marriage.

[LorenzoB]

Antonin Scalia's Gay Marriage Dissent

Good observation muggsy.

[deadeye]

92 percent of the American people back this, 87 percent back that, 106 percent back something else. Where do they get these numbers? I guess if you take a poll to find if actors and actresses are the best at deciding what is best for us all, you take the poll in Hollywood.