LGBT Activist: It’s a “no‑brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist”

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

A 2012 speech by a gay marriage activist has gone viral, with many pointing out an idea that some have believed is at the core of the activist movement to get gay marriage legalized at the federal level. On radio, Glenn played the audio of Masha Gessen claiming that the fight for gay marriage is about redefining the traditional family and that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. Glenn played the shocking audio on radio this morning.

“In a speech just given by Masha Gessen, she is an author and outspoken activist for the LGBT community. She says that many supporters of traditional marriage, what they have speculated for years, she says that it’s true: The push for gay marriage has less to do with the right to marry. She says it’s about diminishing and eventually destroying the institution of marriage and redefining the traditional family,” Glenn said.

In her speech, Gessen told the crowd:

I agree, it’s a no‑brainer that we should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no‑brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist.

That causes my brain some trouble, and part of it why it causes me trouble is because fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there, you know, because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie. The institution of marriage is going to change and it should change. And again I don’t think it should exist. And I don’t like taking part in creating fictions about my life. That’s sort of not what I had in mind when I came out 30 years ago.

Glenn said that her argument shows the progressive agenda with gay marriage is really about transforming the institution of marriage through the government. He said that once personal conscious and faith are replaced by a collective conscious through the government, it will no longer be acceptable for churches to only define marriage as between a man and a woman.

“Once the State says ‘This is the way it goes,’ that’s the way it’s going to go,” Glenn said.

He also said that this story also needs to be looked at in a broader context and beside other major stories in the news today. He specifically pointed out the Romeike family and the comments made by Melissa Harris-Perry as examples of progressives looking to fundamentally transform the definition of family and the role that parents play in their children’s lives.

Glenn did say that he had no problem with Gessen and appreciated her honesty.

Glenn gave his own views on gay marriage, which boil down to the idea that anyone can marry anyone they choose. However, he doesn’t want his church or any church to be forced to recognize gay marriage if it’s inconsistent with their beliefs. He warned that once government defines marriage, faith and churches are taken out of the equation.

“I know where I get the value from my marriage, and I get it from my faith and from my God. It is a contract, a covenant between me and my spouse with God. That’s what marriage is,” Glenn explained, “The question we should be asking ourselves is why is government defining marriage? Why is government even in the marriage business? It shouldn’t be in the marriage business because once it’s in the marriage business, then it chooses. And once it chooses, well, now you’ve got something else going on. Now your church is not going to not be able to marry gay couples.”

 

  • http://www.artinphoenix.com/gallery/grimm snowleopard (cat folk gallery)

    Destroy the concept and idea of family – mother, father, children, and you open the door to it being replaced by ‘father, mother, brother, sister’ being the STATE.

    That is the end game of the activists, the Progressives and Democratic Socialists: the State, and the collective, that is all which matters for them in the end.

    One thing the activists should ask is this – if they do win in the end, how can they be sure that the STATE, and those who win control in the end, will not decide to make them enemies of the state?

  • Anonymous

     

    Folks! We The People!

    Its very much long overdue that we ask ourselves a few questions in private
    far away from We The People’s tax paid elected government employees so as to
    have a private conversation in regards to a much needed assessment and
    evaluation to and of, how well they (our tax paid elected government employees)
    are serving and protecting The Constitution of the United States of America, We
    The People and We The People’s Posterity!

    It’s about time that We The People conduct a public review of the past
    decades covering from the 1950′s till present and start asking ourselves (We
    The People) how is it possible that during the 1950″s America’s Posterity
    was being taught by public school teachers things like the three R’s called the
    fundamentals of childhood education to the extremely bizarre childish nonsense
    of public school teachers today that want to expose America’s Posterity to
    things previously considered CRIMES of NATURE? Why is it so important for the
    public schools of today to encourage America’s Posterity to be
    interested in the criminal acts of human sexual pleasure that have been
    previously established century’s ago as being taboo? And it most certainly is
    the right time to ask where do our ( We The People) tax paid elected government
    employees think they get this anti social authority to expose America’s
    Posterity to such negative things that are contrary to Human Life on Earth!

    We The People…We Need To Talk!

  • MarsBarsTru7

    This segment is actually quite important and I thank the Beck crew for exposing this. This is one of those things that needs to be disseminated. We need to keep finding examples of them being honest about their motives. Our forebears missed the boat with Margaret Sanger, we need to make sure our generation does not do the same with this issue.

    Find them being candid. Invite them to be candid. Record them. Quote them. Link to them saying what they have to say. Get screen shots. And circulate it. Let everyone know them for what and who they really are.

    And this is why they are what they are:

    “For the invisible things of God from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:”
    “Because, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish hearts were darkened.”
    “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,”
    “And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.”
    “Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:”
    “Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.”
    “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:”
    “And likewise also the men, leaving the natural relationship with woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.”
    “And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;”
    “Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,”
    “Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,”
    “Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:”
    “Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.”

    - Romans 1:20-32

    They have been given over to reprobate minds because of their rejection of God. They are irrational, illogical, and without moral foundation. We need to eliminate their “cause” from the political sphere by forcing our government to adhere to Constitutional Law and recognizing that they can not dictate the terms of marriage and they can not infringe upon our rights to appeal to a minority group that self-identifies by their sexual deviancy.

  • http://www.facebook.com/danteferrigno Dante Ferrigno

    This is what this whole thing has been about all along, an attack on Judeo-Christian morality in order to legitimize perversion.  Marriage is what it is, the union of a man and a woman before God.  With this union that man and woman may choose to procreate or not to do so, but the reason it should be legitimized by government is that its a fundamental part of our culture and the cornerstone of the family unit.  Has our government perverted this simple thing? Yes! But that is not a reason to redefine the word and our culture.  At best it tells us we should reevaluate our legal system and purge all the unconstitutional crap destroying our country.

  • http://twitter.com/DonBahn1 Don Bahn

    FDR’s Social Security, was the first shot at destroying the family. LBJ’s war on poverty was the second shot destroying family. The ACLU took the Bible out of school, followed by removing prayer. Progressives have been working to destroy the American way since Abe Lincoln was shot.

  • Sargonarhes

    Jesus said give Caesar’s things to Caesar and God’s things to God. I know what the Biblical view of Marriage is, and the State can’t tell me otherwise.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jon.galt.5454 Jon Galt

    “I also think equally that it’s a no‑brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist.”

    Nobody (here anyway) is forced to be married, so nobody is forcing you to marry anyone.
    So, because YOU believe marriage shouldn’t exist, nobody else should ever be allowed to marry.

    This type of thinking is very typical… of 5 year olds.  Most kids grow out of this by the age of 8. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/jon.galt.5454 Jon Galt

     Excellent, snowleopard!

    You know as well as I, the useful idiots are the first to die.

  • Anonymous

    God watched Adam dawdling in the Garden of Eden and had sympathy upon his own creation.  He sensed an independently lonely feeling within Adam’s heart and decided to give him a suitable companion.  He chose to give him an Eve, not a Steve.  GOD instituted marriage, not man.  GOD governs marriage, never man.  The only true marriages (unions that fall under the original definition of the word, and don’t scoff at the nature of how two bodies fit together to procreate),  are those defined by God.  The government really shouldn’t have a take on marriage.  Actually there is no “take” on marriage.  Marriage is for men and women, not for men and men, not for women and women, not for cat and dog, not for human and tree.  “Take” it or leave it gay people, you are different from the rest of us.  You are not the same.  Stop trying to tell me that you are the same.  You’re not. Bye now.

  • http://www.facebook.com/john.beam1 ‘John Beam

    It goes much further than who and what the collectivists want controlled by the state.  It goes as far as destroying everything culturally involved with human life before the collective takes over.  I mean, imagine life that has been scrubbed of all influences of mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters, and the roles that they played.  Imagine a culture where individual choice and liberty is considered evil, and the only “good” is for the collective, and that good is dictated by an elitist class,  It’s George Orwell’s dystopian nightmare.

  • Anonymous

    How about no govt involvement in marriage, gay, straight or whatever? It should just be a legal or religious matter, period.

  • Anonymous

    It is indeed becoming a “Brave New World” where children will no longer be born, but will be decanted, where their station in life will be designated before birth (or decantation) and where a drug (Soma?) will be given as part of their salary so that they can go on little “vacations” and not have to deal with the realities of life. Mr. Huxley, you were only a few years off in your predictions. Why did we not listen?

  • http://twitter.com/rhettjum lin

    The glbt are true hedonists.  No consequences, no morals, just pleasure seekers trying to ruin culture and society.  Where is God? He does not come into the picture as He does not approve.

  • Sugar Land Flash

    There are a couple of good examples of how the STATE has potential to operate.  See Daniel.  Note the positions to which Daniel and his three friends were elevated and to which positions they were “demoted” in just three short years.  If you or anyone else reading this post do not recall, read the first half of Daniel.  Frankly, I had missed the point I am making until a recent study of Daniel.  It is a picture of how and what the State can do.

  • crazy betty

    they think once they have mans approval, they will finally feel “ok” inside but they won’t.  everyone who has not accepted Jesus Christ has a God shaped void in their chest/heart area that will never stop and nothing but Christ can fill it.  oh they will try anything to try and fill it, to make that empty space, that longing go away, they will use sex, drugs, money, power, drinking,…anything you can think of but nothing ever works – except for Jesus Christ Himself.  I should know.  my heart breaks for these ignorant, blind fools because by the time most of them figure it out, it will be too late.  what an evil and wicked generation.  I ask God to forgive us – forgive this nation.

    Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14But small is the gate and NARROW the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. – Matthew 7:13

  • crazy betty

    yeah, the man chick said her kids have 5 parents.  what vile and despicable people.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Richard-Myers/100000861470718 Richard Myers

    This explains something that has always bothered me, why gay couples always insisted that they wanted to be married so they have equal legal rights as “straight” married couples. I never understood why they couldn’t be given the same legal rights yet call it something else. Pair bonding, union, or any other term that would make them happy yet leave traditional marriage, a covenant between a man, woman and their god in its original form. This explains it, it’s not that they want to be married, they don’t want “normal, straight” people married. I hope that Masha Gessen is an extremist and is not a typical representative of the gay community.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bruce-Roberts/1353241205 Bruce Roberts

    Hmmm …. the collective … why don’t the progressives just call it what it is???    The progressives just want everyone to be happily assimilated into the BORG!  After all, the BORG was only striving for perfection?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borg_(Star_Trek)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000303879569 Nanette Gray

    better said, taking God out of marriage which He created. The real end game, I believe is to destroy anything and everything God made as “good” by he that “steals, kills and destroys”, Satan himself. If one listens to God’s words, the father protects the family against evil. The movement in this country has become very. very evil..even those that call themselves “Christians” are blinded by their own PRIDE! The cup of iniquity is almost full…beware America! Your judgements are coming neigh!

  • Anonymous

    IT truly is a no-brainer you know for us who remain straight ( as you gay’s call us and i tell you that really hurt’s ) What really is the worst part is you want equal right’s which you do what you want but I just can’t understand when you are already one up on us so called(straights)
    YOU HAVE EQUAL PART’S so don’t whine !
                                                    FAMILY FIRST RIGHT AFTER GOD

  • Anonymous

    I love my wife, I make love to her.  But I love a lot of other people and don’t make love to them.  I equate my wife’s body with her heart, mind, and soul.  I love the entire picture and the whole vastness of her being, even the negative aspects.  
    I would have to say that Jesus Christ expects me to love everyone on some level, but not on THAT level.  Look at heterosexuality and homosexuality from an abstract point of view for a moment.  God said that you could fall in love with anyone, YOU HAVE HALF OF THE PEOPLE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD TO CHOOSE FROM!  BUT YOU WANT IT ALL!  It is human nature to have your cake and eat it too.  
    The first time I ever danced close to a pretty girl, I had a feeling that no dude could ever give me.  But hey, that’s just me, and the majority of humanity.

  • Anonymous

    I like being married.  I think it’s just typical of someone who hasn’t ever truly been in love before to say this kind of a thing. 

    Who is Jon Galt? ;)

  • http://twitter.com/Rapture_Me Nelson Swiger Jr.

    The Bible say we are all vile and despicable and that is why Jesus Christ (Yeshua), gave his life and rose from the dead. We are all sinners and deserve God’s wrath be poured out on us, but Jesus washes us white as snow in his shed blood. We need to love the homosexual and lead them to the Cross to partake in salvation that is a gift of God. 

  • Anonymous

    Since God has given us the definition of marriage…it will stand against all odds. That’s the beauty of our Creator…He minces no words.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_4HAW7OERGSC7VZM72V7IGDJ3B4 Sharmane

    The sacrament of marriage does not come from the laws of man, but from God.  The state has no business tampering with or being involved in any of the Holy sacraments.  

  • landofaahs

    For some strange reason my short post was not accepted yesterday.  Perhaps it was just too short.  All it said was “Gen. 19 redo”.  Perhaps lengthening it will suffice.

  • Sandie

    ;>))

  • Sandie

     “This type of thinking is very typical… of 5 year olds.” . . . yes it is, and typical of the left – especially the liberal progressives. As much as they want to claim to be the science minded, they are terribly ignorant about the development of the human species, the family unit and permanent pairing. This is also something seen in many species of the animal kingdom – geese and  wolves come to mind immediately. But then there are the black widow spiders who kill and eat their mates … sounds like the next thing the progs will want to make constitutional. LMAO!

  • http://twitter.com/fawnday Dawn Brayton

    The church started the whole idea of marriage in the first place. It was a legal way for people to have kids. And for the church to have a congregation. She is sort of wrong, though. The entire thing of mariage shouldn’t be changed, it should be just another choice. Otherwise those of us who are asexual or who never wanted kids are just as much on the outside as the gay people are. Plus, the last part of vows about til death do us part need to not be said unles it’s a choice. It’s tough on a family when the two main people in it outgrow each other

  • greywolfrs

    Where I do not disagree with your statement, it’s not about that to the gay community. The gay community wants this to fly in the face of religion, that is their agenda. They could simply be happy wit “civil unions,” that afford them the same rights as a marriage, but no, they MUST do everything they can to tear down the religious idea of marriage.

  • greywolfrs

    One needs to understand that the gay community has their agenda and that agenda is to tear down the religious idea of marriage. They could be happy with “civil unions,” that afford them the same rights as a “marriage,” but no, they MUST tear down the religious idea of marriage. Most, if not all, religions say that homosexuality is wrong, therefore, it is about tearing down those religions for not accepting them. That is why the gay community is pushing this so hard. As far as the politicians are concerned, it is about control and religion takes away from the control over people. It’s exactly why Communists get rid of religion, so they can maintain the illusion of control. The Communists within the Democrap party are pushing this because it helps destroy another facet of religion and gives them more power and control. (or the illusion of more) The government only got involved in marriage because it was another way to tax people. They realized that they could make money by requiring blood tests and licenses. I believe the blood tests are no longer required, but a license is still needed…

  • greywolfrs

    The government found a way to “tax” people more by requiring a lincense to get married, it’s about the money to them. That is the only reason they are involved.

  • greywolfrs

    You can lead a horse to water….

  • Anonymous

     God is now creating a family, he is the Father, Jesus is his first born son among many brethren yet to come. Satan hates God and by our law-makers allowing gays to have their way, is worshiping the devil and helping him destroy the future family of God.

  • Anonymous

     we need to talk…

  • Anonymous

    I saw your post in my dashboard. Disqus was having a bad Monday apparently.

  • Anonymous

     Look at the Muslim world, where children as young as three and four, are trained by sac-religious thugs to commit atrocities against those who do not follow the rules of sharia. You are right – without family, what we end up with is mindless robots having no compassion for their fellow man.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Eric-Bonk/100001609338804 Eric Bonk

    There are So Many in the Gay Community that are being played by these Activist on the Fringe Edges They honestly want to be married in a traditional sense. They want the white picket fence and the whole ball of wax. What, She is talking about is something totally different and evil in nature.

  • Anonymous

    You sir are right they know that we are there $ that’s just one side of the coin though after they get the money for the license,$100, $200 whatever there choice on the flip side divorce is were the BIG MONEY is at .

  • Zooropa Fly

    The ‘family unit’ as such has been under attack for decades, via t.v. film the media and mass consumerism. We are all individuals increasingly living more alone with less strong family ties. The promotion of gay rights and marriage has been a contributing factor, but Ms Gessen and other mouthpieces of the ‘movement’ are pawns in the game, consequences of bigger things.  

    But what the hell’s she on about ?   If she thinks marriage shouldn’t exist why is she going to all this trouble to get something she doesn’t believe in ?   To satisfy her real beliefs her and partner should be rebelling against the system by ‘living in sin’ forever (sin’s exciting right ?). Society has long accepted gay people and gone out of it’s way to accommodate their coupling requirements via civil partnerships, so maybe it’s time to stop the marches and pantomime gayness ?  
     It’s not a disease, it’s not abnormal, it’s always existed (even in the animal kingdom), and mainstream society currently has no problems with it, in fact it’s more likely over represented.

    Marriage is defined as a man/woman union. So nothing else is a Marriage.   As stated by many – Administrators and Officers should stay out of it.

    So some possible consequences of a society with weak family bonds and people not looking out for one another or prepared to help one another –  might be the government locking down City’s at a time and rifling through homes: removing political opponents; collecting gold; collecting guns.. that sort of thing. All on ‘executive orders’ bypassing any judicial system..  

    Now does that kind of scenario sound like something else ??

  • Anonymous

    ANY CONFUSION ?
    LEVITICUS  20:13
    IT means that you can do as you please ,BUT YOU DIE BLOOD on your hands read it don’t dispute it YOUR SIN’S are YOUR’S !!!
    NO confusion there is there !!

  • http://www.facebook.com/jay.markes.3 Jay Markes

     They need to tear down the religious idea of marriage, because it serves to remind their conscience of the truth.

  • Anonymous

    You need to balance that out a bit, Nelson, otherwise you’ll be part of the problem, as you and other well-meaning Christians throw our children to the wolves:

    I Corinthians 5:9-13

    9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
    10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
    11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
    12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?
    13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

  • Anonymous

    She’s right. There should be no civil marriage. There should be religious marriage, which means nothing legally, and there should be civil unions for all the legal rights of marriage, which of course should be available to any two people who are of age and are not close relatives.

  • Anonymous

    the confusion is that you think the bible has anything to do with american laws or public life. 

    anyway, that’s not at all what that passage in leviticus means. not only are you a fascist, you’re wrong.

  • Anonymous

    Yes, traditional marriage is being attacked. No longer is marriage about property, or a dowry, or the father selling the woman to the new husband. No longer is marriage forced on people by their parents. No longer are different races forbidden from marrying. Progress.

  • Anonymous

    that’s the same point she’s making. marriage should not be a legal thing in america because it’s a religious thing.

  • Anonymous

    How come libertarians never suggest the state remove itself from marriage altogether? Why should the state be involved? But since it is involved, and since it grants specific rights and benefits to married people (among other reasons), there is really no constitutional basis for legally preventing gay people to marry. 

    As for the lady above, she hardly represents the views of all gay people, feminists, lgbt activists, etc. She hardly represents some unified vision of some unified “left.” Would you say a comment by John McCain represents all republicans? That’s the biggest of many big problems with GB and his flock: the oversimplification of complex issues. Human civilization is constantly changing and will continue to do so. Things have never been ONE way and they never will be. 

    Galt, what would Ayn Rand say about this issue?

  • Guest

     Why stop there? Who should get to decide what the limitations are?

  • Anonymous

    “Glenn gave his own views on gay marriage, which boil down to the idea that anyone can marry anyone they choose. However, he doesn’t want his church or any church to be forced to recognize gay marriage if it’s inconsistent with their beliefs.”

    Yes, anyone can marry anyone they choose — provided it’s actually a marriage. “Gay marriage” is an oxymoron. There’s no such thing. Glenn of all people should recognize how progressives are all about changing the definitions of words for political reasons — that is, how ORWELLIAN they are, how downright evil they are, how they pervert language and logic.
    “How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four; calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it a leg.”- Abraham Lincoln

  • Anonymous

    If you have a good reason for more restrictions, I’m open to hearing them. 

  • Anonymous

    AND YOU are funny I think by your attitude I must have hit a nerve ! YOU know what I mean to. DO as you will and make it work for you !
    AND you know what it means that’s why YOU are pissed off !
    SEE that it’s darkness ahead ,go ask your nearest pastor .
    YDOULY only you and your mate know the answer don’t ya. 

  • Sandie

     Hey, you’re the one playing with changing this thing. What would you change it too, you can’t leave it undefined. Why is it liberals want to leave everything loose and messy, no order, just chaos.  Make it open to same sex? same family? no age discrepancy? no species limitations? Go ahead, decide what it should be and justify why you would draw the lines where you would draw them.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t know what you could be talking about. I was quite specific:

    “any two people who are of age and are not close relatives.”

    Not loose, not messy, not chaotic. Quite specific.

  • Sandie

    My question was quite specific and you responded while ignoring it.

    Why stop there?
    Who should get to decide what the limitations are?

  • Anonymous

    I would think that Beck would be on the right side of history for a change since he used to sleep with a man, according to a witness.

    Gays have every right to marital misery as anyone else.

  • Anonymous

    I would think that Beck would be on the right side of history for a change since he used to sleep with a man, according to a witness.

    Gays have every right to marital misery as anyone else.

  • Zooropa Fly

    “the confusion is that you think the bible has anything to do with american laws”….    You may want to re-think that one..

  • Zooropa Fly

    Marriage has existed in many shapes and sizes across space and time. Commonality being it’s twixt man and woman.  And if a Culture operates with a dowry system who the hell are you to dictate otherwise ?   

    Certain progress has been made in recent times, but then again I don’t believe divorce rates and fidelity are going in the right direction – so what you calling progress ?

  • Anonymous

    Remember back according to a witness when Glenn and I used to ride your ass like a bike MAN though’s were the day’s weren’t they sorry about that one time, you still love us according to ?xoxoxoxoxo   You have yourself a day now OK

  • Anonymous

    SODOM & GOMORRAH
    PROGRESS got them KILLED by GOD
    Not forbidden GOOD one, there darkness is the same as YOUR’S
    Don’t look back you just might be enjoying a very salty life,well more than you are now .
    FORBIDDEN by GOD get it , man’s laws work only for man when it work’s for man !    LEVITICUS 20:13  GOD’S LAW attack that will you.
                                                **************
    LOOK up what a fascist is , YOU need some schooling see what progressive thought has done for YOU !!!!!

  • Anonymous

    How ya been Sandie?

  • greywolfrs

    You are absolutely wrong, Libertarians have been saying that the government has no place in marriage.

  • greywolfrs

    Not that I disagree, but the government first had to take control of the marriage part before they could get to the divorce part.

  • greywolfrs

    Larry Sinclair, enough sad, vicki tiffany.

  • Anonymous

    I totally agree with you : CONTROL perfect !!

  • http://youtu.be/0iRCvDwF26Q Sam Fisher

    Oh look Victor the moron Tiffany is using a known liar to
    prove yet another lie that he seems to think is real. I guess all liberals believe
    everything they hear on the internet like Obama being a gay Muslim lizard alien
    from Mars. Take your conspiracy theories somewhere else I but your idiot
    buddies at alternut would believe your lies. They would believe everything like
    you mindless troll.   

  • Anonymous

    This stuff is not new:

    “In Manchester, Engels met Mary Burns, a fierce young working woman with radical opinions. They began a relationship that lasted until her death in 1862.[18][19] The two never married, as both were against the institution of marriage. While Engels regarded monogamy as a virtue, state and church regulated marriage were to him a form of class oppression. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Engels

    This is revealing, too, as we recently were treated to a Progressive talkinghead’s views on collective ‘ownership’ of children:  http://www.bukisa.com/articles/14832_frederick-engels-views-on-marriage

    But it’s even older than Engels’ warped view:

    Quoting from Scott’s Napoleon, vol. 1, Pg. 173, “Intimately connected with these laws affecting religion, was that which reduced the union of marriage… to the state of a mere civil contract of a transitory character, which *any two persons* might engage in, and cast loose at pleasure when their taste was changed or their appetite gratified.
    If fiends had set themselves at work to discover a mode of most effectually destroying whatever is venerable, graceful, or permanent, in domestic life, and obtaining at the same time an assurance that the mischief chief which it was their object to create should be perpetuated from one generation to another, they could not have invented a more effectual plan than the degradation of marriage into a state of mere occasional cohabitation or licensed concubinage. Sophie Arnoult, an actress famous for the witty things she said, described the republican marriage as the sacrament of adultery.”Study the French Revolution, its causes and effects, and you will understand what the Progressives are progressing toward.

  • Anonymous

    I’m pretty sure that none of this really got traction until the “marriage penalty” was removed from the Federal tax code.

  • Sandie

     Pretty good – you? Liked your post.

  • Sandie

    The Guest poster above,  Victor Tiffany, is documented making claims about Beck having a gay relationship
    with a man.   What Vic is doing is called DEFAMATION. Defamation includes both
    slander and libel.  Libel is printed and slander is (generally) spoken. It is a civil offense.
     
    Vic thinks that because Beck is a public figure, he can’t sue Victor, but Vic is wrong.  People in Beck’s position, (public figure), have successfully
    sued the National Enquirer, a rag similar to Victor’s website (ragsite IMO),
    for doing what he is doing. The Enquirer has plenty of money and good lawyers, unlike Victor, but it didn’t help them against  Carol Burnett, or Kate Hudson, or Gary Condit’s wife to mention a few.
     

  • guest 29

    separation of church and state?

  • guest 29

    god is not going to attack us relax

  • guest 29

    right id much rather be controlled by the church

  • Anonymous

    Well not exactly. Our fundamental laws are derived from the religious ones, no getting away from it. In many ways religions (circa. older times) effectively were government.

  • Anonymous

    OK that makes me feel much better thank you so much Muhammad