Your ‘Yes’ Vote Will Defend the Sacred
- Print print this page
- Discuss 42 comments, Blog about
Advertisement
I fear that in this world today, we have lost the ideal of the sacredness of certain institutions. One of these institutions has been around for several millennia, and has served as the bedrock of civilized culture. This institution is traditional marriage.
Marriage has been attacked since God ordained it in the Garden of Eden. The nature of mankind is to blame for its current condition. Jesus spoke of divorce in the New Testament and said that it was allowed only under instances of adultery, and it was permitted because of the hardness of our hearts.
It is true that there have been poor examples of what marriage looks like, and yet there have also been wonderful examples of what marriage ought to be.
Traditional marriage is in sad shape today. Marriage is mocked when husband and wife cheat on one another and when we leave the original intent of what marriage was intended for.
A redefinition of marriage will not fix marriage. Homosexual marriage will be eventually mocked and is not the solution.
Our problems are not health benefits, or the right to raise children, or even the right to marry whom we love. None of which are good excuses, nor rights in and of themselves.
Our problem is the hardness of our hearts and the fact that there is nothing sacred left in our lives. Marriage is a holy and sacred institution, not a contract.
I will vote for Amendment One on May 8 to defend the sacred.
Matt Friede
Carthage
More like this story
Advertisement
Comments
JimHeim 1 year, 1 month ago
Marriage has been attacked since the Garden of Eden? Really?
If the amendment passes, gay marriage will be illegal here. If it fails to pass, gay marriage will be illegal here. What's the point? Why encumber the Constitution with vague, harmful language when there is no purpose served.
marriage between people of the same sax has been illegal here for well over a hundred years. It's not likely to change anytime soon.
And who's going to break it to Matt that marriage is a contract, enforceable in the courts and always has been? Matt's living is a separate reality.
fugitiveguy 1 year, 1 month ago
"If the amendment passes, gay marriage will be illegal here. If it fails to pass, gay marriage will be illegal here. What's the point?"
Well, if the ammendment really changes nothing, then why is the left so up in arms to defeat it?
JimHeim 1 year, 1 month ago
fugitiveguy, pay attention. The amendment does nothing to prevent gay marriage. It does a lot of harm to the unmarried, which is probably the point of the amendment anyway.
Just one effect: In states where this amendment has passed, domestic violence convictions have been overturned, because the state cannot recognize a non-marital situation. I don't see the benefit.
cornbread 1 year, 1 month ago
Amendment One won't protect marriage.
Divorce will still be legal. Adultery will still happen.
Amendment One will harm taxpaying citizens of North Carolina.
Vote AGAINST on May 8.
JD 1 year, 1 month ago
This is a homophobic rant and I feel sorry for you.
Heterosexuals cheat on spouses, live in open and swinging relationships, and abandon children. Why be biased against a homosexual? Should they not be permitted to visit their significant other in hospital? This bill is nothing more than a religious minority trying to force their views on others. This bill also negatively effects couples who practice cohabitation. amendment 1 is just hate under the guise of religious zeal.
Guy_Forks 1 year, 1 month ago
Homosexual marriage predates the current socially accepted definition of one man and one woman. Same sex couples where given the same burial rights and heterosexual couples a late as 90,000 years ago. The current prohibitions against homosexual behavior is a concept brought to us by the late roman empire, perpetuated by the people of the book, Judaism, Christianity, and later Islam.
Nothing is new, homosexuals have been always part of human nature. They always will be.
If god gave us the natural rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the right to seek our own joy, and to seek out who he intends us to be, what would god think as we seek to limit these rights in others? Our we not commanded to live and let live, and let god be the judge?
I think if god created every man and woman in his image, then god must be a little gay too.
AM910 1 year, 1 month ago
Why doesn't the state enact a No Divorce Amendment if it wants to protect marriage? Oh, I forgot. Republicans like to trade in their spouses for a newer model every 10 years.
SoPinesNo1 1 year, 1 month ago
Vote yes. A same sex marriage is against nature.
Hembloche 1 year, 1 month ago
Hey Jim, do you happen to know where some friends and I might be able to pick up some Vote NO buttons or bumper stickers or anything of that nature?
JustThinking 1 year, 1 month ago
VOTE Y E S. Stop wanting to change things up just to satisfy and justify! What's next? Brother marrying sister? Look out!
Courseaire 1 year, 1 month ago
JT - That's a tough question to answer - have you seen my sister or her lesbian friend? Wow!!! I'm going to have to vote "No" to keep my options open.
Amazed 1 year, 1 month ago
Please Vote No on May 8th against Amendment One.
Heteros haven't held marriage as sacred for a very long time...anyone know the divorce rate these days? Last I heard was around a 50% divorce rate.
It seems very simple to me. If you and your church don't approve of gay marriage, then don't allow it. If you don't want your children to 'catch the gay', then raise them as you see fit...hating people for whom they love, etc. It puzzles me that so many people are concerned about what goes on in other people's homes. Live your life as you see fit. Allow others the same freedom.
Amazed 1 year, 1 month ago
Truth hurts by Amazed
ProudYankee 1 year, 1 month ago
Ammendment One = More propaganda from the Christian Taliban
JohnChappell 1 year, 1 month ago
So, some of us are hoping the Large Hadron Supercollider will nail down the Higgs, and we will finally be able to answer the age old philosophical question as to why there is anything at all rather than nothing.
And others of us appear to believe there actually was a Garden of Eden and that snakes once traveled about in some other way than on their bellies.
This amendment is tyranny; make no mistake about that. As always, tyrants come to us wearing religious garments.
Aristotle figured that out long ago:
Thatcher 1 year, 1 month ago
I will not pretend to know what God's view on this Amendment is. Nor will I attempt to tell others what God's view actually is. No.
JimHeim 1 year, 1 month ago
Hembloche, drop me a note at info@mooredemocrats.org and I'll send you the information when I get home tomorrow.
JustThinking 1 year, 1 month ago
PROPAGANDA ! More Libral PROPAGANDA! Vote YES for NC or just move to California!
clodfelter37 1 year, 1 month ago
Please do not monkey with our constitution. Vote NO and you can do so beginning Thursday April 19th
lakeview 1 year, 1 month ago
Jimheim, please send me some of those buttons as well. In fact, send me a few thousand.
lakeview 1 year, 1 month ago
ProudYankee, Christian Taliban?? Kinda stole that phrase from the phrase Liberal Taliban which has been used for years, didn't you?
Nezumi 1 year, 1 month ago
Makes you wonder how the non-Judeo/Christian ancient cultures ever got by without divine instructions.
Nezumi 1 year, 1 month ago
I echo John Chappell's comments - it seems like the spirit of "Deus lo vult" is alive and well.
JER 1 year, 1 month ago
lakeview: I dropped of a box of buttons for you. They are in the Garden of Eden being guarded by a serpent. Since you already have that address, just pick them up at your convenience.
JimHeim 1 year, 1 month ago
JustThinkg, Your computer has a virus. When you turn it on, it seems to send the word 'PROPAGANDA' for no apparent reason.
MikeNC 1 year, 1 month ago
For those interested...One Stop Voting has opened this morning at 9AM until 5PM. You can do your early primary voting and that for Ammendment 1 at the Moore County Agricultural Center in Carhage at 707 Pinehurst Ave. The wearing of any button is not necessary....Mike
JustThinking 1 year, 1 month ago
JimHeim,,,,Yes, you are right. I was trying to "drop you a note at info@mooredemocraps.org to get some info. So I must have picked up the virus from there! Hahaha! Ever read Animal Farm? PROPAGANDA !!!
JimHeim 1 year, 1 month ago
And photo ID is not required ot vote. Thanks Governor Perdue for your veto.
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year, 1 month ago
I am a conundrum, i was recently called a deidistc christian whatever the heck that means, but I realize that while christians may believe in the spiritual nature of marrige and may believe that it is held as a covenent of GOD, we do not as a nation advise ourselves in how we act, what we do, and what we beleive in based on the bible anymore. The church has been beaten into a place of hypocrites and politicians. Gay marrige will happen. Just as one day faster then light travel will happen.
Nezumi 1 year, 1 month ago
TAP - I see you're a fellow sci-fi fan, so I'm not sure if your last sentence was facetious or not!
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year, 1 month ago
Well, I figure, cell phones, air travel, and spliting the atom was sci fi 80 years ago, faster then light travel is not impossible, just at the moment unattainable. I have always felt that utopia is not an unreachable goal, it is just at the moment unattainable due to technological and social limitations. Until we can live in a world that has the same moral standard for all people, white, black, man, woman, gay, straight, it is but a distant dream. But I have no issues with gay people marrying. To think that we have not evolved to a point where we would restrict another human from attaining happyness due to a creed, when we have prided ourselves on our evolution of social equality is disturbing. The plain truth is that anyone who would say that we have a religious duty to keep gays from marrying does not understand GOD in the first place and most likely never will.
People seem to forget that Jesus was a saviour. He filled his discipleship with drunks, criminals, murders, prostitutes and all other manner of social malcontempts. The purpose of Jesus's walk and life was to show an un waivering love for humanity. Jesus's death on a cross redeemed the human race of its transgressions and recerted there place as a perfect being in the creators eyes.
The problem is that like so many religious people today. The people making the claims have never read or if they have never understood the word. Anyone who places judgement on another person are themselves commiting sin. Jesus's words of love thy enemy, love thy neighbor, have been altogether thrown out for religious fervor. The problem is that GOD, Jesus, they do not represent religion. Jesus abolished religion, yet we created a new one around him.
Religion is man seeking GOD, Christianity is GOD seeking man.
lakeview 1 year, 1 month ago
JER- I'd perfer you bring them to me but you won't which is percisely the reason I asked JIMHEIM NOT YOU.
visigrad 1 year, 1 month ago
wow...@Jim planning to vote several times ? thought you were going on a trip
MARRIAGE IS WHAT IT IS THE UNION BETWEEN ONE MANAND ONE WOMAN. Any other relationship any two three or however many you choose wish to have will never be MARRIAGE.
visigrad 1 year, 1 month ago
Hello Anonymous,
I would not dream of trying to define God....but God has revealed Himself to man in the Scriptures, wherein He tells us to love the sinner but hate the sin. Yes God hates sin..because sin is a rejection of Him and His teachings...one of which states for "a man to lie with a man is an abomination". God does not hate the man...but He hates the sin..because sin keeps us away from the Creator and Savior who took on human flesh for the sole purpose of dying for those sins which we ALL commit so that we could, if we choose to keep His commandments, spend eternity with Him in Heaven. So you see I love my brothers and sisters and yes that includes those who have same sex attraction enough to speak the truth to them....so that they too will spend eternity withThe Lord
jimt 1 year, 1 month ago
Visigrad, Clearly you believe "marriage" is a holy undertaking, one ordained by God. But I'm afraid I have some bad news for you. In the United States, marriage is a legal contract between two people. These two people must take out a licence to marry issued by the state in which they reside. The licencing process explains the laws and obligations each person is agreeing to undertake with regard to property, debts, medical decision-making, and so on. Each person must attest that they understand their rights and obligations. The couple pays a fee and the state can then issue to licence. The couple may then ask an authorized individual to marry them. Judges, justices of the peace, among others, may perform the act. Immediately after the declaration that the two people involved are pronounced to be married, they each sign a document, which is also signed by the individual who performed the act and another witness. That's it Visigard. They're married under the laws of the individual state and the United States. No religion, no religious ceremony, no holy undertaking, yet they're legally married.
Accordingly, your argument, which seems to be based on the religious belief that marriage is a "union between one man and one women," need not be true in a secular society. You are entitled to believe on the basis of your religious convictions that marriage is a religious act, and that marriage can only be between one man and one woman in keeping with your religious beliefs.
But here's the bad news for you, and others who take this religious based definition of marriage to be only and exclusive legitimate form of marriage; the United States' legal system functions on the basis of civil and secular laws, not on the basis of religious doctrines and ceremonies. In the United States marriage is a legal contract between two individuals. That's it! That's all it is legally. And this specific kind of contract ought to be available between a man and a woman, a man and a man, and a woman and a woman.
If you can't get your head around this legal definition of marriage, and continue to believe that marriage is solely a religious act, and that accordingly religious doctrine should govern who can marry who; I humbly suggest you seek out a country to live in that explicitly enacts its laws on the basis of a religous text and social system stemming from said text. Iran, for example, comes to mind.
MikeNC 1 year, 1 month ago
jimt 8 hours, 49 minutes ago....But here's the bad news for you, and others who take this religious based definition of marriage to be only and exclusive legitimate form of marriage; the United States' legal system functions on the basis of civil and secular laws
You laid it out pretty well. You did however omit a coupld of interesting facts. I found it interesting that a picture ID is required from both applicants naturally. Below is a link which lays the entire pre requirements of our marriage laws. And here's the bad news for you and some others....Notice thatt they directly and legally answer this question in one word. "You and others should be able to get your head around this" current legal definition of marriage you speak of above. Just because you say this ought to be available to others does not make it so. This is what the current legal law states in that one word......Same Sex Marriage: No.
So we all now vote on the future legal marriage requirements in North Carolina. Whether it stands between one man and one woman or whether it changes to where it "ought" to be according to jimt. And then of course that sets legal precedent to further change it to who knows whom might be able to be legally married in the future.....Mike
http://www.usmarriagelaws.com/search/united_states/north_carolina/
jimt 1 year, 1 month ago
The entire argument over whether marriage has to be between one man and one woman results from the fact that most States, not all, now require marriage to be between one man and one woman. The way the argument will be legally settled in the United States is through legislation allowing gay couples to wed. That legislation will undoubtedly make its way through the courts who will determine whether the legislation is or is not constitutional. It will, we both seem to agree, be settled as a matter of law, not on religious terms. I was making the case that marriage, under our current legal system, is a civil matter, not a religious one. So the case that Bonnie and Visgrad make, that marriage is a religous matter, is simply not true . Finally, Amendment One, as you surely must already know, does much more than affirm that marriage in North Carolina is just between one man and one woman. It bans civil unions, and its vague language raises legitimate concerns over a host of other issues.
katimae 1 year, 1 month ago
Allowing everyone to take part in marriage will not make it any less sacred. Marriage is about committment, and the more committed, monogamous relationships in our country - the better!! In a country where church and state are separate (supposedly) one group of people CANNOT force their moral beliefs on another group by changing the constitution to DENY equal treatment. Regardless of what you PERSONALLY believe about marriage, it is not right to treat segments of the FREE population of the US differently. No one is telling the religious right they are not ALLOWED to believe in God. So why is it ok for them to legislate morality???
Courseaire 1 year, 1 month ago
Henceforth there shall be an excise tax on married couples that cheat. If thou breakest thy vow thou shall pay an excise tax of 10% of gross income for each such occurrence, as well as, three hail mary passes, plus 15 yards.
JER 1 year, 1 month ago
Courseaire: This idea would balance the budget in less than a year!!!
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year, 1 month ago
Very nicely laid our JimT, as to Visigrad, it would be said that to love ones brother is to be able to tell him the truth, were by a gay relationship would be an abomination as laid out in the old text. However it is curious to me how this can be when the presbyterian church has openly gay ordained ministers. How can it be against god when the church allows it? To say that this is man is not god would be a good argument, however, it seems that the church it self has sactioned the act of being gay.
Courseaire 1 year, 1 month ago
Damn those Presbyterians, they just can't be relied on.