Avoid this concept in defining marriage: 'Natural'

  • Article by: MICHAEL RODNING BASH
  • Updated: November 2, 2012 - 8:04 PM

That has been the go-to word in attempts to guard the status quo.

  • 42
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
pumiceNov. 2, 12 8:20 PM

Of all the concepts which have been viewed as "natural" at some point in the history of humanity, these two are the most unarguable, in my opinion: "It is in society's best interest to ensure that [all families] receive the support they need to thrive," and "Our real interest, society's real interest and the interest of all parents lies in fostering and supporting stable, long-term relationships, whether gay or straight."

38
11
erikj3Nov. 2, 12 8:36 PM

VOTE NO (twice)!!

34
17
humph010Nov. 2, 12 8:40 PM

Ah-ha! Another person who challenges the superiority of our Christian religion to legally define what is most correct for our state!

16
34
BABloomNov. 2, 12 8:56 PM

The last time I went to a wedding the cards offered congratulations and love, but none of them mentioned natural law and procreation. Don't be fooled into adding this hate-filled amendment to our constitution by false logic. Vote NO in November!

38
12
goferfanzNov. 2, 12 8:59 PM

Of course, this column ignores the fact same-sex couples will never exceed 1% of the American parenting collective. Meanwhile, the 99% (sound familiar) are wilting under 41% illegitimacy and a terrible economy. The more we make "marriage" a meaningless concept, the more our society will decay. It isnt complicated, nor will this folly end well for America.

13
44
mahaneyrobkaNov. 2, 12 8:59 PM

Finally a lawyer that knows what he is talking about and presents a rock solid case!! Well said.

36
13
chavistaNov. 2, 12 9:04 PM

humph010 Nov. 2, 12 8:40 PM - "Ah-ha! Another person who challenges the superiority of our Christian religion to legally define what is most correct for our state!" ***** Your statement says it all, no truer words have ever been spoken by a bigot. Just ask a skin head what he thinks of blacks and he will state, "the superiority of our white race and religion". Or what the Nazi says about the Jew, "the superiority of our white race and religion". Or the words of the white man and the Native American, "the superiority of our white race and religion". Need I go on with women, Japanese during WWII, Muslims, etc. Now you use the same words when you talk about Gays. Let me inform you that you are not superior in any way to any GLBT person. This is why it's so important to defeat this Amendment by voting NO!

39
10
bluebird227Nov. 2, 12 9:36 PM

goferanz-- If "same-sex couples will never exceed 1% of the American parenting collective," then why does the church say to vote yes for the children? What is everyone so worried about? Plus, you certainly can't blame gays for your stats on the failed marriages. Since same sex families already exist, wouldn't it make sense to encourage family stability and let them marry?

36
10
ti1310Nov. 2, 12 9:42 PM

---Of course, this column ignores the fact same-sex couples will never exceed 1% of the American parenting collective. Meanwhile, the 99% (sound familiar) are wilting under 41% illegitimacy and a terrible economy. The more we make "marriage" a meaningless concept, the more our society will decay. It isnt complicated, nor will this folly end well for America.---- goferfanz freedom is not a matter of percentages, and you statements about the 41 percent illegitimacy is a red herring and has nothing to do with SSM. Your peers have told you this in your profession, the studies have the facts to back it up. Your argument is specious at best..

30
7
ebfauvelNov. 2, 12 9:53 PM

"[S]ame-sex couples will never exceed 1% of the American parenting collective."

What percentage of the "American parenting collective" would they need to attain to "earn" the right to marry? 5%? 10%? 50% + 1?

30
7

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT