Ideally, they are not. In reality, the laws are sometimes in opposition to moral standards. This is sometimes where the dichotomy between church and state become relevant. We see now that the papal nuncio pronounces that there are moral laws which supersede and law of man. He referred specifically to religious freedom.
Quality comparisons will only work when comparing within the same type. It doesn’t make sense to compare a good friendship with a bad marriage or the bond between siblings to that of two colleagues who get along at work. The point I’m getting at is that a relationship that represents the long-term bond with the understanding of long-term and life-long commitment and mutual dependence, physical intimacy, and a common household that is entitled to social and economic benefits and legal powers is called a marriage when between a man and woman. How is it not a marriage when when two men or two women do the same thing? Should we coin a new word? I know we can’t use existing words like friendship, what I described is not a friendship.
Many in the media and academics are promoting this form of xenophobia, but because the media owns public perception, it’s accepted as a form of enlightenment by the unthinking kool-aid drinkers who have closed their minds to their promotion of this form of xenophobia in a society where every other form of xenophobia is to be crushed, except this one. What a hypocrisy. It’s the nexus of “the world is overpopulated” and “god doesn’t exist.” It’s scary how many people voted for more of this, but didn’t know it since they were baited by class warfare. Oh, well. Too late now.
Anti-God secular engineering took 40 years to get us to this point. And with God, nothing is impossible.
I’m not sure if it’s the media promoting heterophobia or something else.
But, here’s the problem.
Of course it is. Once you separate the fake emotional words from the facts in most media stories, you’ll find that it’s mostly about emotion and pagan bias. It’s all good, unless it’s coming from a Christian source. Then it’s all suspect.
You missed the point. It works both ways. Heterophobes and homophobes. Just different sides of the same coin created by the media monster.
No way. Two separate coins. The media knows what it is doing. Bias does not happen by accident.
Because marriage is not marriage without two different genders. I already explained the reason. It is a contradiction in terms. Further, what an authentically married heterosexual couple “does,” sexually, is not what people of two genders “do,” sexually. Sexual “contact” or “activity” per se does not a marriage make. The “sex” in homosexual behavior is not intercourse. It is a perversion of sexual activity, which is why to glorify it and insitutionalize it is itself a perverted and disordered idea.
Who’s “we?” (You can do what you like; just don’t expect other people to buy into a fantasy and a pretension.)
Homosexual relationships are sexualized friendships. That is, there is sexual attraction involved, and there is friendship as well. The two components together do not equal marriage, nor do they come close to marriage.
It’s not at all fun and games. It’s sad, actually.
They are not doing everything a mae/female married couple is doing. They are not doing so physically, they are not doing so emotionally, because the nature of male/female love is radically different from the nature of male/male and female/female love.
Are you trying to say that the conservative media is not biased, but that the liberal media is? If so, then I would suggest that you might want to reconsider that opinion.
E,
Marriage is about offspring which is why homosexual relationships can never be marriage. Marriage doesn’t need love.
How insulting the meaning of marriage can you be? Have you ever married?
Love is not necessary for it to be a marriage, but it can make marriages much better.
True on both counts.
Just to be clear any legal definition that contradicts moral truth is no real definition.
Romance and love are so frequently confused in secular society.