Same Sex Marriage is a Right!

68

By cjhunsinger

 

Same Sex Marriage is a Right!

Only under Marxist rule

Charles J. Hunsinger

 

As one who believes ardently that,” Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”, are, as unalienable, as Freedom of Speech: I have great difficulty in not accepting the idea and practice of same sex marriage. Who am I to insert my personal preferences into someone else’s life? That, I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman is to insist that same sex couples are not entitled to the happiness enjoyed through a marriage? No, that is not my position, nor do I think, that, that is the position of most people who would refute same sex marriage. Marriage is a great deal more then a legal union, whether it is civil or religious. Marriage speaks to a culture, to a heritage, to an accepted norm and in most cases to a rite of passage from child to adult, from immaturity to maturity. It is to herald to the world that two people have arrived and are ready to assume their place in the continuation of the human race. It is to continue, an enormously successful norm, of father, mother and child. It is a norm, a normalcy of conduct and behavior that provides the necessary nutrients for positive growth, stability and the well being of a society. The family engenders all those things, which are abhorrent to an agenda that is absent individual freedom.  

“To achieve One World Government it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, their loyalty to family traditions and national identification.”

Brock Chisholm, former Director United Nations World Health Organization

The Constitution of The United States does not address marriage in any fashion. Such is left to the States and to the people. Federal intrusion into the intimacy of marriage and consequently the family structure was deemed not a federal prerogative. Control of the bedroom and of the home was simply not an issue; as such control or attempted control would lead to a perversion of authority and government.

There have been attempts to amend the Constitution to include an amendment that would define marriage, as between a man and women, Senate Bill SJ 16 and the House Bill HJ 56.This, I believe this is wrong and an attempt by some to wean their way into the bedroom, as would be the insidious realm of religion. Some State and city governments have taken it upon themselves to proceed with same sex marriage even though the majority will of the people opposes such “marriage.”  

The history of same sex marriage or association and opposition to it dates to antiquity, as well as arguments in support. The current push to achieve equality by those who promote an abnormality, as a normalcy is my focus. As it was said,” When the abnormal becomes normal; the normal becomes abnormal.”  

It was not until the 1950’ and 60’s that any real organized effort to legitimize same sex marriage begin to surface and since has grown tremendously. Was there an organizing point, a point of origin? Where did the money come from for such efforts?  Did someone or something legitimize same sex marriage? If there was such a point of origin: What would be the point? What would be the purpose? Is there an agenda that goes beyond same sex marriage and then. Is same sex marriage being used, as other social issues, to undermine societal values, norms and America?

Excerpt  On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the full text of which appears in the following pages. Following this historic act the Assembly called upon all Member countries to publicize the text of the Declaration and "to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories." Further discovery can be made here, http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

 

 As stated above the Founding Fathers would have found it a perversion of power to attempt to legislate morality, but, as history has shown us, such legislation comes easy to a government void of the vices of freedom.

To the questions asked above; was there an organizing point, a point of origin?

Yes. The legalization of same sex marriage was accomplished in The United Nations Declaration on Human Rights. The excerpt appears below.   

Article 16, United Nations Declaration on Human Rights—A Treaty---The Law of the land—Our land

A ratified and signed Treaty supersedes and nullifies The Constitution.

·         (1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.

·         (2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.

·         (3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

The Article defines marriage, as between men and women, not a man and a woman giving legality to same sex marriage and to adoption by such unions. The Article, also, redefines the “family”, as can be evidenced by the “new” definition of family that is now put forth by corporations, of all descriptions. One TV network even promotes it’s slogan as, “A new kind of family.” 

The family is the core unit of any given society. If the government has the power to redefine it, as has been done here, then the family and all of its nutrient value no longer exist. The values, morals, loyalties and bonds of and to the family are now transferred to the government.

We, being the United States government, created, with help from our (Socialist) European, Chinese and Russian friends the documents of the United Nations. It is interesting to note that, as was demanded by the highlighted paragraph above, the Declaration of Human Rights be displayed publicly for all to see: it was not. It was not for a very good reason and that reason would have been that the American people would have marched, with guns, on Washington. It is better to slowly reeducate the people, deceive them, engineer them, herd them and then harvest them, as in Human Resources.

Same sex marriage is, but one wedge used to engineer the dismantling of America. As you read through the UN Charter and the Declaration on the UN website glance through the hundreds of NGO’s and specialized UN organizations that proudly promote all that is a contradiction to individual freedom and capitalism. Marxist thought is obvious and rampant. The United Nations is a Marx oriented organization with socialism at its core. Please understand that all UN documents were written for a universal compliance without reference to national sovereignty.

 

 

Lori Reeve 23 months ago

Wow, Chuck! Your writing is very clear and thorough with your intelligence shining through. I am impressed with your ability to clearly point out the truth in a very logical manner without getting emotional about an issue. Reading your posts gives me a lot to think about. Thank you for directing me here.

outdoorsguy profile image

outdoorsguy 23 months ago

as a Conservative.... I agree.. surprise.

I truly believe in the Founding fathers wall of Seperation of religion and the Government.

if a state issues a marriage license, which is a legal document. then it is open to all. to deny any age of consent people the right to get said license with out reason beyond religious beliefs is wrong.

now Churches dont have to marry them, churchs can say what they want to about it. that is their right.. but they have no say on who gets married before a Judge. or Legal represenative of the state or Federal Government.

Jefferson had this to say about Religion and civil government.

"The clergy, by getting themselves established by law and ingrafted into the machine of government, have been a very formidable engine against the civil and religious rights of man." --Thomas Jefferson to Jeremiah Moor, 1800.

"I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct its exercises, its discipline, or its doctrines; nor of the religious societies, that the General Government should be invested with the power of effecting any uniformity of time or matter among them. Fasting and prayer are religious exercises. The enjoining them, an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the times for these exercises and the objects proper for them according to their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their own hands where the Constitution has deposited it... Everyone must act according to the dictates of his own reason, and mine tells me that civil powers alone have been given to the President of the United States, and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808.

madison had this to say...

" The settled opinion here is, that religion is essentially distinct from civil Government, and exempt from its cognizance; that a connection between them is injurious to both"

- James Madison; Letter to Edward Everett, March 18, 1823

but on the legal side, they have no say. So let them have their rights and join the ranks of Misery that so many enjoy.

Submit a Comment
Members and Guests

Sign in or sign up and post using a hubpages account.



    • No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked
    • Comments are not for promoting your Hubs or other sites

    Please wait working