To any Christians, secularists or people of other faiths, I've been wanting to get this off of my chest. I want to discuss the government's role of involving itself in the concept of marriage. Before I begin, I'll address that I've never been married, never been in relationship, I'm still a virgin, and I'm pretty young; even so, I'd still like to say my piece. It doesn't take a crackhead to know that drugs are bad (M'kay).
From my perspective and a spiritual one, the government doesn't care about the morality of marriage. A newlywed couple could just sign a certificate and BAM! the government considers you married. There's more to marriage than a piece of paper, sex and one or two children. It's about loyalty, caring for one another and possessing an eternal, unconditional love that transcends physical, emotional, financial, and social boundaries. It's like how the bible verse 1Corinthians 13:4-8 goes:
Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails.
Unfortunately in loopy, secular, hedonistic, rabbit-hole, 21st century, tactics such as swinging, cuckholding, cheating and other perverted fetishes are A-OK, but actual commitment and staying through thick and thin is "just too hard" for post-no fault divorce, post-sexual r(d)evolution citizens, ranging from Baby boomers to Millennials. If the government really cared about the morals of marriage, there would be laws prohibiting and possibly fining such actions like cheating. However, there are already objective, marital rules. They came from God and obviously, no subjective-minded secularist will follow them. Also, if the government did perform the aforementioned action,we'd be living in Orwellian and Huxley society, with them worming their way into every aspect of our lives.
The majority of Leviticus chapter 18 pertains to sexual morality in marriage and courtship
Now unto the heart of the matter, with the advent of fag marriage legalized, add the propensity of high divorce rates, and the addition of the previous deviancy mentioned, it's evident that the government assumes that they can just define and "redefine" marriage and end it at the drop of a hat. For that, I say: NO!!!!!!
Dear readers, especially to all of the Christians, I ask you, Who are we, to define the spiritual union that was given from God to us? The answer is "nothing". We are no one, but sinful creatures who must maintain ourselves into spiritual holiness for eternal salvation and happiness from God. God, the father, is the one who designed marriage to be ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN(Genesis 2:23-24) Why, oh why, is one of the fringe groups with the higher chance of domestic abuse, STDs, and promiscuity given the chance of "marriage"? Before you know it, the government will condone matrimony of multiple partners(polyamory), beastiality(the act is LEGAL in Canada, A.K.A Cuckistan), and dare I say pedophilia. As western society continues to indulge and normalize perversion, people won't see the horrible aftereffects of a lustful, degenerate, lifestyle. One of the most imbecilic responses to the refusal of degenerate marriages is: "It doesn't affect you!!", seriously, for any Christians reading this, go watch Common Filth on Youtube. He speaks the truth.
Anyway, back to the subject, marriage should NOT be a right by the government. I mean, come on, with the divorce rates so high in America, I'm surprised the government and even businesses haven't created and favored divorce parties, oh wait... In terms of tax benefits, don't you think that's just an initiative for straight, married couples to breed like rabbits? but I digress. Since our culture is steeped in fornication, even if you think the government gives more tax benefits to families because of the offspring, it's obvious for unwed/divorced women to receive more benefits through welfare, child support, or alimony, thus destroying the nuclear family and increasing the codependency of government. In addendum, I'll state that the government doesn't even care about kids, they're either forced into tax-fed, indoctrinating facilities to shove false history, libtard propaganda, and even DISGUSTING sex acts, from K-12th grade and hell, especially cult college, or just take your pre-developed child into the popular youth-sacrificing altar, originated by a racist, eugenicist, dubbed "Planned Parenthood". :D
Since marriage is considered a religious and spiritual ceremony, it's evident that only the church should handle it. We're already living in a time where Christians are coerced to forego their beliefs to run a business, such as running a bakery. I feel like in the future, even churches (that are not lukewarm) will either kowtow to Big Daddy gov'ment or go under by them. Like I said, this is a culture of fornication, so obviously, non-Christian and/or non-straight couples don't appreciate marriage, so why should we give it to them for free? On one exception, the only time the government should intervene into a religious marriage is when one or both parties are forced and/or underage to cosent. Therefore, cults run by Warren Jeffs/David Koresh wannabes and the FLDS Mormons will be exposed and condemned for their child marriages, misogyny and child/domestic abuse. I'll say one thing, Sharia law child marriages will NEVER be ingratiated into America.
*WATCH THIS SHOW!!! MORMONS ARE NOT AS PLEASANT AS YOU THINK THEY ARE!!!
Well, that's my piece on marriage and government. Here's Rand Paul's opinion on the matter What do you think? Give me a response in the comment sections.
Please upvote, resteem and follow. :D
Check my FB
If you want more steem followers, click here :D
Very powerful message
Thanks. I felt like God was speaking through me. :D
If you are going to address an issue, address it by its name. Gay rights, not
fag. I do not disagree with your statement. I am upset by your disrespect of the people that you need to reach with your post and yet you push them away by your word choice.I don't see the word(s) fag/faggot as slurs. Gays call each other that, so why can't non-gays? Also, I don't mince words. I won't condemn homosexuals, but I'll condemn their disgusting, degenerate lifestyle.
Their lifestyle is grotesque. Calling them by that name isn't delivering the message you care to send.
I'm sending the truth to those fags who embrace their degeneracy. Hiding words to satiate their feelings will only coddle them.
I don't understand how you plan to reach them by offending them.
meep
You again.
Telling them the whole truth and nothing but THE TRUTH. THAT THEY'RE FAGGOTS.
They already know that.
Resteemed and 100% upvoted. Thank you for using my service!
Read here how the new green bot from Berlin works.
@resteem.bot
Thank you very much.
The problem is that marriage represents 2 things in our society.
A religious ritual (which existed long before the birth of Christ, and so was defined long before any biblical reference to it. This is variant between religions, and up to the leaders of each religion to define the context in which they teach it. Those unhappy with how it's taught are free to go to another religion that practices what they believe, just like all other aspects of faith.
A state institution which protects and guarantees rights between those persons who have made an agreement under the laws of that state. In that regard, those rights and protections should not be isolated to any one religious faction, as we are a nation which allows all people to practice that which they choose with equal coverage under the law. Because of this, a persons sexuality, race, etc should not be allowed to be a factor... as this is about equal rights, not religion.
I think the failing here is when any specific set of religion tries to enforce it's particular brand of morality on the rest of society, generally through the force of manipulating government.
Christians like yourself have seemingly claimed the right to define marriage based on a very limited set of teachings from their chosen holy book, when even in their own bible if you read deeper it was ONCE defined as something MUCH different. Not something gone into willingly by both parties based on love, but based on financial arrangements made by the parents of those to be wed. Christian kings married their daughters off for political power. Their sons married into lands and wealth. Is this your definition of morality? Is this the fine christian way of things?
2 Corinthians 6:14 says:
"Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?"
Should there then be laws put into place to prevent an atheist from being married to a christian, regardless of sexuality? How far would you go in seeking a christian version of sharia law in regards to the institution of marriage?
Religion is much like a penis... best when not shoved down other people's throats against their will (though if you do, based on Deuteronomy you're obligated buy them from their father and to marry them even if they don't consent).
That's a different issue, but nevertheless, it needs to be solved.