Archive

Archive for the ‘Marriage Redefinition’ Category

My prediction about the Princeton Professors…

Yesterday, I predicted that the debate between two Princeton professors would not broach what I consider to be the crucial questions on the marriage issue.

Princeton Professors duke it out over the definition of marriage.

Princeton Professors duke it out over the definition of marriage.

The opening salvo by Professor Emeritus James Doig seemed more concerned with catching Professor Robert George in some inconsistency than in really exploring what the redefinition of marriage might ultimately mean.

In my reaction to his article, I posed these question. I consider them the most crucial issues.

How will redefining marriage redefine parenthood? Are we happy with that redefinition? And do we really want to change the relationship between the State and the citizen in the way that this redefinition really entails?

And I predicted that the week-long exchange between the Princeton Professors would not address these issues.

Today’s response by Professor Robert George has many interesting arguments and ideas. But he does not remotely answer these questions.

Stay tuned. Maybe Professor Doig will take them up tomorrow.

I’m not holding my breath.

No one is doing what the Ruth Institute is doing: inspiring the Survivors of the Sexual Revolution to to recover from their negative experiences and share their stories with the young. Join us here.

 

Porn addiction is as serious as drug addiction

July 2nd, 2014 Comments off

Is this what we have come to with the redefinition of marriage–that a man, a lawyer no less (not sure if that helps or harms my case) wants to legally marry his computer? The second part of this article speaks about the actual, physiological changes that occur in the brains of porn addicts. Spoiler alert: these changes are not good!

This article comes from Mercatornet.com.

BY NICOLE M. KING

The News Story – Florida man demands right to wed computer

A recent article in The Telegraph reports that a former lawyer, Chris Sevier, recently sought a marriage license to marry his Mac-book computer. In trying to argue his case, Sevier explained that he had become addicted to pornography via his computer, and so, “over time, [he] began preferring sex with [his] computer over sex with real women.” Read more…

I had Masha Gessen’s dream of five parents… and it sucked

June 25th, 2014 Comments off
Around March of 2013 I came across the words of a prominent LGBT activist named Masha Gessen:
I have three kids who have five parents, more or less, and I don’t see why they shouldn’t have five parents legally… I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality, and I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.

 

Imagine having five parents! Here’s what it means: it means going back and forth between all those households on a regular basis, never having a single place to call home during your most tender and vulnerable years. It means having divided Christmases, other holidays, and birthdays–you spend one with one parent, and another with the other parent, never spending a single holiday or birthday with both parents. Imagine having each of your parents completely ignore the other half of you, the other half of your family, as if it did not even exist. Meanwhile, imagine each parent pouring their energy into their new families and creating a unified home for their new children. These experiences give you the definite impression of being something leftover, something not quite part of them. You live like that on a daily basis for 18+ years.

Does this look like a fun way to spend your childhood?

As a child, would you choose a family structure advocated by Masha Gessen? Does this look fun?

 

I don’t have to imagine, because I had five parents. I had five parents because my mom and dad divorced when I was about three; my mom remarried once and my dad remarried twice. So I had a mom and two step-moms, and a dad and one step-dad. In this day and age children can already have five parents. That’s how badly marriage has deteriorated already. The main difference between what Gessen advocates and my experience is that my step parents were not legal parents; she advocates for all of the adults in her situation to be legal parents.

Read more…

Dissecting Sexual Revolutionary Propaganda

May 29th, 2014 Comments off

As I have said many times in my speeches (available at the Ruth Institute podcast page), the Sexual Revolution is irrational and its goals are impossible.  Therefore, those committed to the Sexual Revolution must also commit themselves to a steady stream of propaganda to over-write the basic facts of reality. This sometimes includes the subtle or not-so-subtle rewriting of history.

Today’s exhibit in understanding Revolutionary Propaganda comes to us from the Religion News Service, which describes itself this way.

The Religion News Service aims to be the largest single source of news about religion, spirituality and ideas. We strive to inform, illuminate and inspire public discourse on matters relating to belief and convictions.

So I find it odd, to say the least, to find an organization with this mission, taking for granted the arguments of Sexual Revolutionaries in an article, described as an “analysis.”

Let me confine myself to one particularly noticeable re-writing of history.

Written by Kevin Eckstrom, the Editor in Chief of the Religion News Service, the article claims in the section called, “A problem of overreach:”

Conservative groups resisted moves to compromise on a half-measure like civil unions; (Tony) Perkins’ organization (Family Research Council) calls civil unions nothing more than “a slow-motion surrender.” And that, said veteran gay marriage proponent Jonathan Rauch, was a critical mistake.

The author provides no context for cultural conservative Perkins’ comment, and he gives pro-gay Jonathan Rauch the last word. By doing this, the author suggests that Perkins’ assessment is incorrect, without actually taking responsibility for proving this, or even stating that his assessment is incorrect. Read more…

Are “marriage equality” and gender segregation compatible?

January 24th, 2014 Comments off

by Kelly Bartlett

I grew up in a predominately white suburb in Connecticut. Our school was so monochromatic that the powers-that-be decided to bus in blacks from Hartford.

One of the blacks that got off the bus at my school was Joy, with her fluffy side ponytail and glorious smile. Joy said things I never heard spoken out loud before such as, “Lordy, Lordy” in our English class. The black girls taught me Double Dutch jump rope, after which there’s no going back to single. And at our school dances, we were all awed by the skill and grace of the African Americans; even the guys could bust a move. Read more…

Marriage rites: what’s blood got to do with it?

November 25th, 2013 Comments off
The marriage equality slippery slope logically ends in legalised incest.

When marriage laws are amended to bring same-sex couples within their ambit, those couples become subject to the existing restrictions imposed by blood and family ties (consanguinity and affinity) which forbid people from marrying someone too close to them. So if a woman cannot marry her brother, uncle or nephew, neither can she marry her sister, aunt or niece. Simple, right? As far as it goes, yes. But not once we consider the rationale behind consanguinity restrictions and what the application of the “marriage equality” paradigm to them is likely to lead to. Read more…

Woman marries Catholic bridge

November 21st, 2013 Comments off

Further redefinition of marriage

I’m only half-kidding. Australian woman Jodi Rose did in fact marry Le Pont du Diable bridge (also known as the Devil’s Bridge) on June 17. But it cannot be confirmed that the bridge, raised by Benedictines, remained Catholic throughout its lifespan. Read more…

What is the core of marriage?

September 13th, 2013 Comments off

by Sherif Girgis

If you can bear the clinking of plates, this address by Sherif Girgis is well-worth listening to. He is a Princeton graduate, Rhodes Scholar and graduate student at Princeton and Yale in law and philosophy. As a colleague of Princeton Professor Robert P. George he wrote a widely-read paper defending traditional marriage and attacking the notion of same-sex marriage. His words are cool, charitable and lucid.  Watch it here.

The Battle over Marriage in our Military

September 12th, 2013 Comments off

from the Nom blog

In recent days, you might have read the news about the latest battlefront in the fight for marriage: a battlefront, this time, where real soldiers are involved.

I’m talking about the National Guard in Texas and Mississippi, whose leaders are choosing to obey those states’ marriage laws instead of a Department of Defense directive that would have the entire DOD recognize same-sex ‘marriages.’ The contention over that directive from Defense Secretary Hagel is just the latest fallout of June’s fateful Supreme Court ruling against Section III of the Defense of Marriage Act. Read more…

Polls show support of traditional marriage

August 22nd, 2013 Comments off

from NOM

Two major polls demonstrate that the majority of Americans believe marriage SHOULD NOT BE redefined.

First, a Rice University poll has surfaced showing that a majority of Americans — 53% — STILL believe marriage should only be between a man and a woman! This comparative study demonstrates that the idea that droves of Americans are changing their minds in favor of redefining marriage is a myth.

And today news of a recent Fox News poll has come to light that is even better. Fox asked the question, Would you approve or disapprove of changing the definition of the word marriage to also include same-sex couples?

56% said they would disapprove, while only 39% would approve!