tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28127675.post3399700212176638446..comments2024-03-14T12:01:17.079-04:00Comments on ROBERT BIDINOTTO: How Government Created the Gay Marriage Controversy Robert Bidinottohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11777797272563802442noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28127675.post-36226682296775893682015-08-15T21:13:58.924-04:002015-08-15T21:13:58.924-04:00There are a few things that governments are instit...There are a few things that governments are instituted among men for. To protect the country from enemies both foreign and domestic; to make sure that contracts are honored; to provide services that local groups might not be able to do efficiently (police, fire, rescue &c).<br /><br />Ideally, its entry into the domain of marriage falls under the "contracts" area. A couple will get married by getting a "marriage license" (an odd term) from City Hall (who probably send it up the pipe), then in a religious ceremony at a church/synagogue). <br /><br />If we agree that government should touch only lightly, then we'd have to say that it shouldn't interfere in who marries who. Since I'm a firm believer in marriage they way it's been understood for millennia, I have to assume there's a logic error there somewhere.<br /><br />But I do figure that the whole homosexual marriage thing is a multi-pronged attack on the idea of the family. (The line "if everything is a "marriage" under the law, then nothing is", is the kind of thing Chesterton used a lot ("People who will believe nothing will believe anything).)<br /><br />I certainly agree with you that it's all about power and control - the basis of a socialist (and worse) society.<br /><br />Coercion has no place in a free society. (As always, there are exceptions. If Mr A won't pay his allotted taxes, some forms of pressure might need to be brought to bear. But even that assumes a reasonable and rational tax system. ZZMikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16913899667726940233noreply@blogger.com