KevinWestern
Hello
Here's the deal. life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness....No. Liberty isn't about doing whatever you WANT to do.
I want to get money from the casinos. I want to get extra points on my applications for being black. I want to get tax breaks rich people get. That doesn't mean I'm entitled to those things.
Marriage is an institution that has a man and a woman. People who entered into this institution get a few perks, to encourage people to participate in the institution as it benefits our society. Just because we #1, identify the institution with the word "marriage" and #2, promote the institution with a few perks doesn't mean that anybody who wants the perks or wants to be called "married" has a RIGHT to be called married and reap the benefits.
They aren't being denied anything. If two gay people want to find members of the opposite sex and get married, they're entitled to. The word "marriage" doesn't mean 'love". Nobody is denything them the right to love each other, to live together, to combine assets, to adopt children.
But they don't have the right to be called something that they aren't. They aren't "married" just because they want to be "married" and they aren't entitled to the benefits we reserve for people who are willing to commit to being part of a traditional family unit. There are benefits for society and for families to engage in traditional hetero marriage...and just because a couple of people want to reap the benefits without actually engaging in the preferred behavior doesn't mean they have a right to the perks we offer those who do.
My daughter wants to be a self manager. Self managers get an ice cream cone or something, and spend some time with the principal...and I don't know what else.
She hasn't earned it yet. There are certain behaviors she has to exhibit before she is awarded those rewards. Does she have a right to the perks and the title anyway? Nope. Neither are gays entitled to the title and perks we give hetero married couples. They aren't hetero, and they aren't married. So they don't get the title, and they don't get the perks. It's their choice.
Kosher, my case is this. Our liberties should only be restricted when they infringe on another person's rights. Here's some examples of actions that infringe:
(group 1)
1.) Stealing
2.) Assault
3.) Extortion
4.) Rape
5.) Murder
6.) Gov't mandating contraception on employee plans
I'm totally fine with those types of activities being prohibited.
Now, here's some examples of actions that don't infringe on anyone else's personal rights or freedoms within a society:
(group 2)
1.) Wearing purple T-shirts
2.) Protesting peacefully in a public space
3.) Singing quietly in a public park
4.) Dancing at a bar
5.) Smoking pot in your own home
6.) Two consenting adult females getting married
I happen to think that when we restrict any of those things in group 2, we are unnecessarily reducing the amount of free choice we have, and ultimately are unnecessarily stepping closer (no matter how small the step) towards a scenario of government tyranny.
.
.
Happiness is NOT a right. Pursuit of happiness IS.
Until this society drops all references and beliefs in deities, marriage will be defined and a union between ONE man and ONE woman. No matter what the law says, the majority of us will not accept or be forced to sanction something with which they disagree.
Look, this vote in NC is NOW NEW ground. 31 other states have the same or similar laws.
You can scream and carry on as much as you like. It is not going to change a thing.
So I imagine you would consider yourself more of a collectivist than an individualist. Again, that's fine. I'm just a person who wants more liberty versus less - that's all.
.