2 votes

Liberty Defined: Response to Star Parker on undermining freedom

While some religious conservatives are opposed to same sex marriage, the principles of liberty apply to individuals, not to groups.

The 2012 election process has already begun and in the Republican camp Ron Paul again stands in stark contrast to his challengers because of his libertarian views. Star Parker wrote a column recently entitled “A Few Rich Libertarians Help Undermine Freedom”. In her article, she takes issue with the moral stance of certain Republican hedge fund operators who contributed substantially to the legislation process which enabled same-sex marriage in New York. This was attributed to the donors’ views that marriage was an issue of personal freedom and liberty.

Read more at Suite101: Liberty Defined | Suite101.com http://www.suite101.com/content/liberty-defined-a380150#ixzz...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The government shouldn't even

The government shouldn't even be involved in marriage

its so obvious, people don't

its so obvious, people don't know what to say when you tell them that.

Hi Wild Blue

Ironically perhaps, the Roman Catholic Church was busted for child molestation. The RCC continues to accept claims made against it. Few were women. The majority of those who made claims and won were homosexual men, who having won, turned to the Church and said, "I was born and raised Catholic, and now I want to get married".

I find it interesting the Protestant Churches, who are also guilty, but have not purged their Churches, or awarded their victims, are the ones speaking up against homosexual unions.

Hey Granger

There are probably a number of reasons for that disparity. The major one being that for the most part, Protestant churches do not have the same hierarchical system that the Catholic Church possesses. Some denominations are, in fact, highly structured but many are not. Some mainline denominations, such as Presbyterian, Lutheran and Episcopalean have accepted homosexual unions and have even begun ordaining homosexual clergy. Fundamentalist, evangelical, independent denominations, which are by far the most anti-gay marriage denominations are generally more loosely organized and have more of an "every-man-for-himself" mentality... You are right in the sense that abuses generally get swept under the carpet, ignored or are distanced from the central headquarters.

My point

in the article was not whether or not homosexual unions are immoral, but whether or not the government should have any say so in the matter. Every individual has the right to determine and to settle this issue for him or herself and for the government to infringe on that right, whether it be in the form of laws, amendments or government paid education, is an encroachment on the rights of individuals. I now see it as a personal belief and therefore coming under the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses. The only legal issues should be those of property ownership disputes and settlements.

Hi Wild-Blue

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my post, a view of the irony. I am one of those who think it's great the the secular/state has established same sex unions, but I do not think it's the states' business to tell a Church who it can marry.

I thought the only Church that really had an issue with same sex marriage was the Catholic Church, and I stated why in my post above.

(((( hug for you ))))

I agree Granger

in that the government shouldn't be able to tell the church who it can or cannot marry, but should recognize civil unions simply because of the myriad of legal issues that arise from divorce, custody battles, abuse, etc. etc.

Not that the government should pay "social workers" to intrude in these matters either, but some sort of union would have to be recognized in order to settle disputes and render justice I would think...

I used to really like

her articles... but then I used to be a Christion Zionist...

Star Parker

ran for congress in my district last year. She lost the election, but Richardson isn't much better.

Wow, a smear campaign against Republican conservatives...

Here's the plain truth:

Marriage - is - a - contract.

It is not for the Federal government to control.

It is NOT for states to always decide!

It is a contract, between people. They are the only ones qualified to handle it. Even the new District Judge I visited recently understood this simple fact.

They just watched the two people handle their dispute. That is how it should ALWAYS be handled!

Actually....

I understand the spirit - but the Constitution does say the Federal Government is responsible for enforcing contracts.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

Not unconstitutional contracts, right to privacy....

Privacy contracts are exempt from being enacted this way.

http://www.usconstitution.net

Fact is, they do not have those Federal rights.

it usually isn't marriage

that's the problem (with the exception of same-sex)it's the divorce court that becomes the issue... lol

They're all the issue

Because marriage is just a union/contract.

It is NOT up to all the federal courts nor is it in their actual interest to be in charge.

State has to stay out of marriage

Why State wants to be in the marriage business?

Big Brother go f*** yourself!

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

same reason

they want to be in every other business...

because they want to keep us in chains

Big Brother business:
"keep them in chains".

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

nobody said it better

I'm using

a new publisher... Suite 101 instead of Examiner... I like a lot of articles I've seen on S101... although Examiner seems to be more popular at the moment....