Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom
The Supreme Court has issued a decision on marriage, but that doesn’t end the debate. Now that the court has ruled, Americans face momentous debates about the nature of marriage and religious liberty. In Truth Overruled, the first book to respond to the Supreme Court’s decision on same-sex marriage, Ryan Anderson draws on the best philosophy and social science to explain what marriage is, why it matters for public policy, and the consequences of its legal redefinition.
source
Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]
14:00 "cultural redefinition of marriage". Quite, heterosexuals are primarily to blame; people of bad conscience are often eager to appear as humane and charitable apologists for minorities… especially those who are liable to parade themselves in public in an undignified manner (so undignified that the 'apologists' feel dignified by contrast), pride indeed. 22:30 this so called Plutocracy; when Trump reminds us of a 19 trillion dollar deficit, give or take a few trillion, this is not economic, it is uneconomic; The Uneconomy. Uneconomic elites. It is from within the uneconomy that most people, Libertarians included, form their conceptions of liberty and freedom, actually really licentiousness. The state soon becomes the gangster (military industrial legalism complex) to our inner Moll's.
It seemed like half of the discussion was about abortion, which I found misleading. Abortion involves questions of life and death. Same-sex marriage does not.
"Conjugal" or procreative marriage is very important, but probably nobody on the panel would question the right of elderly people, or those not intending to have children, to marry.
Surrogacy and medically assisted means of obtaining children are used by opposite-sex and same-sex couples.
Opposite-sex marriages are not by definition beneficial to children. Any marriage can be a bad one, and many end in divorce.
Religious liberty is important but does not extend to depriving people of their civil, legal or human rights. There is no legal right to a religious wedding ceremony. A religious institution does not have to perform same-sex marriages and a private person does not have to be involved in such ceremonies. Businesses may also be protected from involvement in such ceremonies. I don't know how far that extends. It seems from the discussion that conscientious objectors can often be accommodated so as not to be personally involved in same-sex marriages. The civil service and the government as a whole, however, are obliged to provide people with the services and documentation to which they are legally entitled.
Stop hate-mongering against gay couples and eventual families that gay couples are raising.
Ryan T. Anderson says he is a virgin and is unmarried in his mid-30s. Many of the same-sex couples who married after equality became law have been together longer than Ryan has been alive. They are more genuinely married than Ryan T. Anderson is intelligent.
Ryan knows nothing about human intimacy, love and commitment. He is a bigoted hack who is painting himself into an increasingly smaller crawl space.
Get a life you stupid bigot. You unmarried virgin in your mid-30s. "Marriage expert" Bwahahahahaha!