Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Gay Tea Party Founder: If We Redefine Marriage, ‘We’re Going to Redefine Children’

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Fly-over country
    Posts
    8,189

    Default Gay Tea Party Founder: If We Redefine Marriage, ‘We’re Going to Redefine Children’

    March 25, 2013
    By Michael James

    CNSNews.com) – Three opponents of same-sex “marriage” spoke at the conservative Heritage Foundation on Monday, including the gay co-founder of the National Capital Tea Party Patriots who argued that children are entitled to a biological mother and a father, and that if the government seeks to redefine marriage to include homosexual couples, it will necessarily also be redefining children.

    “The redefining of marriage, quite frankly I think it’s nuts,” said Doug Mainwaring, co-founder of the National Capital Tea Party Patriots and a homosexual. “Being gay, I’ve had a long time to consider this, look at it.”

    “I used to be pro-same-sex marriage but the more I thought about it, it occurred to me, this just isn’t right,” he said. “Marriage is the most successful institution that civilization has produced over the last few millennia, and we shouldn’t mess with it. If we attempt to redefine marriage, we’re going to redefine children in the same way. In fact, I prefer to use the term ‘undefine’.”

    Mainwaring said he was a resident of Maryland and he and his Patriots’ group had worked to try to stop the same-sex marriage referendum in that state, which became law on Jan. 1 of this year; the legislation had been passed by the Maryland General Assembly in February 2012 and approved by voters (52%) in a statewide referendum on Nov. 6, 2012.

    Mainwaring explained that he had thought a lot about having a family but that even if the law allowed him to adopt children, “my kids would still have a giant, gaping hole in their lives because kids need a mom and a dad in the house.”

    Mainwaring made his comments during a panel discussion entitled “The Marriage Debate: What’s at Stake?” Other panelists included Ryan Anderson, author of What Is Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense, and Kellie Fiedorek, an attorney with the Alliance Defending Freedom.

    Starting Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear arguments for two cases: Hollingsworth v. Perry, which concerns Proposition 8 in California and an appellate panel of judges that held the 2008 ballot initiative amending the state constitution to allow only opposite-sex couples to marry was unconstitutional; and a challenge to the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which was enacted in 1996 and defines marriage for federal purposes as the legal union of one man and one woman, and asserts that no U.S. state or political subdivision must recognize a same-sex marriage from another state.


    A homosexual couple and their adopted daughter. (AP)

    “There’s been some confusion on what issue is actually before the Supreme Court,” said Kellie Fiedorek with the Alliance Defending Freedom, a group comprised of Christian attorneys who advocate for religious liberty, the sanctity of life, and marriage and family.

    “The question before the Court is not whether marriage should be redefined,” she said. “The question before the Court is whether the Constitution requires that marriage be redefined. In other words, the question is, does the Constitution demand changing this long-standing definition of marriage that diverse cultures and faiths have embraced and supported throughout all of Western civilization?”

    “Does the Constitution require the court to impose on every American around this country a fundamentally different definition of what marriage is? What the Supreme Court should find is that it does not,” Fiedorek said.

    “The Court should uphold marriage and leave questions about marriage policy to the democratic process and the people” she continued. To do otherwise “would not only usurp the power of the people and get involved with the democratic process, it would ignore the many basic facts we know about what marriage is, and why we’ve valued this institution throughout Western civilization,” she said.

    Ryan T. Anderson said, “The Supreme Court should respect the constitutional authority of American citizens and their elected representatives to make marriage policy.”

    “We don’t need the Supreme Court settling the marriage debate once and for all by striking down laws in all 50 states and making a one-size-fits-all answer on this question,” said Anderson. “They tried doing that 40 years ago in the abortion debate [Roe v. Wade in 1973]. It didn’t settle the debate. It struck down the laws, but it didn’t settle the debate.”

    “Marriage exists to bring together a man and a woman, as husband and wife, to be a mother and father to any children that their union creates,” he said. “It’s based on the truth that men and women are different and complementary. It’s based on the biological fact that reproduction depends on a man and a woman; and it’s based on the social reality that children need a mother and a father – a married mother and father.”

    “The social science evidence shows that mothering and fathering are two different, distinct phenomena,” said Anderson. “Children do best with a mother and a father because they’re not interchangeable.”

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gay-...efine-children

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slave Region 10
    Posts
    113,807

    Default

    Mindwareing is a brave and honest man, I fear for his safety
    They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
    “As a general rule, the earlier you recognize someone is trying to kill you, the better off you’ll be.”

    "You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."



  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    4,017

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lenno View Post
    Mindwareing is a brave and honest man, I fear for his safety
    From who? What would they do? Stone him to death with popcorn ?
    .
    When the search for truth is confused with political advocacy, the pursuit of knowledge is reduced to a quest for power. Alston Chase

    The easiest way to fleece people, is one dollar at a time. Faithful Skeptic


    The Three Phases of Life
    Young: Have time, have ambition, have no money.
    Mid Life: Have ambition, have money, have no time.
    Old: Have time, have money, have no ambition.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slave Region 10
    Posts
    113,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FaithfulSkeptic View Post
    From who? What would they do? Stone him to death with popcorn ?
    yes, 38 cal popcorn
    PS:
    From WHOM
    They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
    “As a general rule, the earlier you recognize someone is trying to kill you, the better off you’ll be.”

    "You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."



  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,842

    Default

    While I do think it better for a child to have both a father and a mother does this preclude a single person from adopting? A single person adopting and giving a child a situation of permanency seems better that perpetual temporary foster care and then cutoff from support at age eighteen.

    Two mothers or two fathers is both a redundancy and a deficiency.
    Nessie and Bigfoot 2016. Change you can believe in.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley
    Posts
    1,507

    Default

    It ain't about love, it's about money.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Time's up - you're it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •