[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
United States News Title: Is Sneakypete To Gay To Understand This? I’ve seen few if any conservatives who can stay on point and stay on issue like Ryan Anderson of the Heritage Foundation in this video. [Here's the short 4:25 video exchange between the homosexual and Ryan Anderson. Spot on response by Anderson, worth watching!] In a forum, a homosexual man asks Anderson why he and his partner shouldn’t be able to file a joint tax return like married couples can. While most conservatives (if they can even answer this question at all, to their shame) fall back on circular arguments and “just because,” Anderson illustrates where the principle embraced by the Left leads. Ideas have consequences, and if you are willing to embrace an idea, you must be willing to embrace where that idea leads. When the homosexual man claims he can get married in California, Ryan responds: “You can be issued a marriage license in the state of California, but you can’t actually get married. And I’m sorry to say it that way, but given what marriage is, it’s not discrimination because everyone is equally eligible for entering into the marital relationship, where you understand marriage as a union of sexually complimentary spouses, a permanent, exclusive union of man and woman, husband and wife, mother and father. “If you’re not interested in entering into that sort of a union, you’re not being discriminated against.” He summarizes and concludes: “It’s not that you don’t have the right to get married. It’s that you aren’t seeking out marriage. Marriage is by nature a union of sexually complimentary spouses, a unit of man and woman, husband and wife, mother and father. And just based on what you’ve said about yourself, it doesn’t sound like you’re interested in forming that sort of a union. It sounds like you’re interested in forming a union with another man, and that’s not a marriage.” Anderson goes straight to the principle behind the whole issue, and won’t be distracted from it. This is why I always call counterfeit marriage what it is: counterfeit marriage. It is not “gay marriage.” It is not “same sex marriage.” It is most assuredly not “marriage.” It is counterfeit marriage, just like a counterfeit $20 bill is a counterfeit $20 bill, not “my $20,” not “another $20,” not “a different $20,” not “a special $20,” not “$20" at all. Rights are not being denied to homosexuals. Homosexuals have the same right to get married that anyone else has, therefore, there is no discrimination or denial of rights whatsoever going on. If a person isn’t willing to do what it takes to be recognized as something, then they have no right to be recognized as that something. If you aren’t willing to do the work it takes to run and win a marathon, you aren’t entitled to call yourself a marathon winner. If you aren’t willing to do what it takes to become a parent, you aren’t entitled to call yourself a parent. If you aren’t willing to start a small business, you aren’t entitled to call yourself a small business owner. If you aren’t willing to do the work it takes to become a Harvard graduate, you aren’t entitled to call yourself a Harvard graduate. If you aren’t willing to go to the police academy and do what it takes to graduate, you aren’t entitled to call yourself a cop. If you aren’t willing to serve in the military, you aren’t entitled to call yourself a veteran. It isn’t rocket science, folks. All it takes is simple logic and reason, and a commitment to stick with the truth. Conservatives: get your act together, learn about the issues, and then get about the task of defending what’s important. If you aren’t willing to do that, then you have no justification to bellyache about the Left’s attack on all that is right and good.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: A K A Stone (#0)
Just a thought... Anderson fails to address the question, and instead focuses on the "definition" of marriage, in his opinion. What should be discussed, is whether or not there is a legal difference between the tax status of a business partnership return-or a corporate return, and a personal tax return. The argument can be made that because a business partnership does not have any duty to establish the sex of the partners...likewise a married couple has no duty to establish their respective sexes either......
"we are tartets from evil doers!!!"
too /to^o/ adverb adverb: too 1. to a higher degree than is desirable, permissible, or possible; excessively. "he was driving too fast" synonyms: excessively, overly, over, unduly, immoderately, inordinately, unreasonably, extremely, exorbitantly, very; More informaltoo-too "invasion would be too risky" •informal very. "you're too kind" 2. in addition; also. "is he coming too?" synonyms: also, as well, in addition, additionally, into the bargain, besides, furthermore, moreover, on top of that, to boot, likewise More
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
|
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|