• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Chicago Free Press runs opinion editorial by Louis Weisberg

JustineCredible

Wading through the Mire
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
1,379
Reaction score
91
Location
Eastern Standard Time zone
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
There's a new foe in town and it has the same ol' ugly head.


Say: "I don't"

I suppose IFI's definition of marriage could be considered liberal in the sense that its only restriction is based on gender. Adulterers, pedophiles, rapists, serial killers, arsonists and all other sorts of freaks and scoundrels would remain free to marry under IFI's delineation-so long as they chose a spouse of the opposite sex. Even men who brutally abused their wives would remain marriage-worthy.

But upstanding, law-abiding, tax-paying citizens who fall in love with someone of the same gender would be denied the right to marry under IFI's proposed amendment.
For instance, a woman who'd lived with her same-sex partner in a monogamous relationship for 35 years would be deemed ineligible. Let's say this hypothetical woman had spent her entire adult life doing good deeds of the sort that Jesus focused on in his ministry-such as feeding the hungry, helping to heal the sick and providing shelter to the poor. And let's say her partner was a civic leader in their community. Let's even make her partner a retired Air Force lieutenant who was awarded the Medal of Honor for heroism in the Gulf War.

None of that matters, according to the knowing people at IFI. The fact that these women loved each other would automatically categorize them as vile and socially unacceptable, regardless of any good they might have done in the world.

If these women were ax murderers in love with men, IFI would not squawk if they skipped down the wedding aisle with their beloveds. But because their genitals match, IFI would denounce it as an affront to good Christians everywhere to allow them the same marriage rights available to mass murderers.

Why? Because IFI is terribly concerned about the appalling state of marriage in our nation. For the first time the number of people married in the United States has dipped below 50 percent. Increasing numbers of heterosexuals are opting to shack up rather than tie the knot. Half of those who do marry decide to throw in the towel. This means that more and more children are growing up in single-parent families, which people on the religious right consider a breeding ground for the mortal sin of homosexuality.

The neo-Christians, whose very interesting religious mission is to enforce a code of sexual morality on others that they don't seem to abide by themselves, simply won't sit quietly and let this happen. Thus they've focused millions of dollars and untold human effort into a campaign to prevent the further erosion of marriage by conducting a preemptive strike against same-sex matrimony.

It's time to stop the tidal wave of unfair and hypocritical marriage laws!
 
Top Bottom