Forcing Belligerent Action on Gay Marriage

The couple just moved to their dream house, one is to become a music teacher at the local Charter School, and the other is to realize their dreams by becoming a hairdresser in the town next to Paul Mitchell Beauty School . When the couple settled in their new house, the neighbor stopped staring. They do not know what to think, the eyes of the couple are very different, and to this day they have not seen this in the community. The difference with this couple is that they are homosexual.

Problems such as two serious offenses affecting our time such as abortion and homosexual marriage are like written by obsolete children. Since social justice is embodied in human behavior, half of the children forgive the great evil. The other half critically condemned the sinner as if they were the only two questions Jesus said, as if they intentionally tried to destroy life and family. This is a wonderful work penetration. As a church, we have a good opportunity to unite anti-secular evil and selfish "disposal" culture. However, we often do not notice much about the legitimacy of the language and the type of people involved. Like our Protestant brothers, politics seems to have defined us as a member of the church instead of Christ. We no longer recognize each other as human beings, but we recognize them as fragments and parcels of several marketing programs designed to protect the church (by the way, as the church is led by the Holy Spirit believe)

To explain this, I call a gay marriage a position. As Andrew Sullivan noted in many of his books, the promotion of homosexual marriage was about strong legal arguments about facts, figures, and equality. This has not been very successful. In the early '00s the information changed a lot. We are your son. Your daughter is your mother and dad. The legal path to homosexual marriage in 2015 is by no means a straight line, but the attitude changed dramatically in a very short time. Is legal argument and evidence growing to overwhelming power that the opposition only dissolves in submission? Or do people who are resistant to gay marriage start treating gays as friends or relatives sharing the same values ​​(and therefore rights)?

The argument that homosexual marriage delicately damages the unique legitimacy of direct marriage is based on paradox. For homosexuals, direct marriage is still the most important, and is the only legitimate social bond. Homosexual marriage can only legitimize direct marriage If it is a true alternative marriage it is clearly not the case. Frankly, there are some valuable proof that every law can persuade sex with others straightly - not to mention marrying someone with their own sex. The only possible effect is to be forced to enter homosexual men and women (usually at a bad price for themselves and their families) to look for family instincts in a more personal and positive environment is. However, this is obviously not a minus plus. Homosexual marriage can avoid many suffering families and create many happy families. In other words, it does not deny family values. This is their extension

Andrew Sullivan's revolutionary article in 1989 presented a conservative case for gay marriage and was completely reprinted