The Senate passes the ‘Respect for Marriage Act’, giving federal protection to homosexual unions and calling them ‘marriage’. Does government have power to redefine religious and cultural traditions, and force others to set aside their own beliefs? Or should government just get out of the marriage business?
Alfonzo Rachel and Bill Whittle create two new episodes of The Virtue Signal each week to counter the cultural narrative, thanks to our Members and donors. To donate, tap the big blue button above. To become a Member and unlock exclusive features of our site, tap the big green button above.
7 replies on “Legislating Morality: ‘Respect for Marriage Act’ Shows Government Should Get Out of Marriage”
There is no such thing as “same sex marriage.” The copyright on the term and patent on the institution of marriage are both held by God. The perverts have no right or ability to change the definition or nature of the term/concept of “marriage.” Perversion by any other name remains perversion.Every single law in the history of mankind, whether for good or ill, was a legislation of SOMEBODY’S morality. Morality has been legislated every single day since the inception of human government.Do not concede the language to the Leftist sewer rats. This abomination is the “Destruction of Marriage Act.” (Just like Obama-nation Care is the “American Healthcare System Destruction Act.”)
One question:
What
is
marriage
for?
I’ve been saying for a long time it should just get out of the marriage business. The only business it has in it at all is contract litigation.
It has no business re-defining it. Those definitions do vary some. And … *especially* … it should NOT be in the business of forcing people under the color of law to embrace marriages that violate their consciences.
Civil rights laws were NOT created to do these things. Their critics were right to fear that they would. Because they are. Their scope keeps expanding as fast as the LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ+%&@! string does.
I don’t think the government should legislate marriage. They can give a license for a civil union, which ensures both parties are of age, are able to give consent, and are not already married. It’s treated as a business contract.
Churches, mosques, temples, etc. can give marriage certificates.
Marriage without religious conviction is a mere legal contract. It’s now treated like a joke due to the no fault divorce laws. Without the risk of being public humiliation over breaking your vows marriage is pointless.
I don’t have anything but support for those of the same sex who live together in a committed relationship having the right to, say, visit their significant other in the hospital, adopt a child together, or be the beneficiary of their estate after an unexpected death. The problem I have with this bill is the possible use of new federal law to attack those who do not condone same-sex marriage.
I would argue that they won’t enforce the law if Muslims are not obeying the new mandates. It is an anti-Christian attack only.
“I believe government should fit in the box it came in”. Bill, I love this! I want it on a t-shirt, a bumper sticker, a yard sign… It is perfectly profound, thank you.