This website has repeatedly argued that government shouldn’t be in the business of sanctioning or banning marriage – gay or straight. Such decisions ought to be left to individual congregations … which last time we checked were still subject to the power of the marketplace.
But that’s not stopping lowest common denominator politicians from exploiting this issue … on both extremes of the political spectrum.
In socially conservative South Carolina, though, Democrats are battling each other over the issue – with the party’s only announced candidate for the U.S. Senate publicly calling out its presumed gubernatorial nominee.
Jay Stamper – the only Democrat running for the Senate seat held by liberal “Republican” Lindsey Graham – challenged 2014 gubernatorial candidate and State Senator Vincent Sheheen (D-Camden) to come out in support of gay marriage.
In fact he created an online petition in which voters urged Sheheen to “please reconsider” his opposition to “marriage equality.”
“Imagine for a moment what it’s like to be gay and in high school in South Carolina,” Stamper wrote in the petition. “Maybe you don’t need to imagine. But try to put yourself in the place of an adolescent looking for acceptance but facing disapproval and bigotry from classmates, teachers, even family members. Now imagine that same student in civics class, studying the South Carolina Constitution and learning that even his own state’s laws sanction discrimination against him.”
“With nowhere to turn, facing bullying and pressure to hide who they really are, is it any wonder that gay youth attempt suicide at four times the rate of their heterosexual classmates?” Stamper’s petition continued.
For some reason, Stamper closed his petition shortly after he created it. He also removed a link to the petition from his Facebook page.
Hmmm …
Still, FITS reached out Sheheen’s camp in an effort to get his position on the issue of gay marriage. His campaign hasn’t been especially accommodating to requests from our website, but we’ll let you know in the event we hear anything of substance.
12 comments
This website repeatedly refuses to understand that in this society, the only marriage that legally exists is one recognized by the state. And before anyone starts hollering about common-law marriages — yes, they are also recognized by the state if certain conditions are met.
As far as religious congregations are concerned, they only matter insofar as certain of their members are empowered BY THE STATE (scuzzi for having to shout) to solemnize a legal marriage. And, until the proper paperwork is filed with the local court, the marriage does not exist.
Persisting in error will not make it so.
This website repeatedly refuses to understand that in this society, the
only marriage that legally exists is one recognized by the state.
I’d like to make an important distinction, though.
Marriage is an individual right, and a person decides based on his/her own beliefs what marriage is. If two (or more) individuals agree to consider themselves married, then by all means they are married in their own eyes. They choose to enforce rules only as it fancies them, although that may not gain recognition in the eyes of religious institutions, or even the government itself.
The significance of involving government is merely to be legally recognized as married and to have laws, rights, benefits, etc., applicable to married persons apply to you and your spouse. Marriage under the law must conform to the rules set forth by whatever entity enforces said law, which is essentially the government. I think it goes without saying that the nature of this country is to apply laws fairly and equally to all persons without discrimination. If that is the case, then laws should cater to the recognition of, as well as the granting of legal rights to, homosexual persons who are married.
The significance of involving a religious institution is merely to exercise your marriage under that institution’s religious guidelines. Marriages under the church must conform to rules set forth by the church, which is usually dictated by how that church interprets whatever holy texts or beliefs they may teach. Again, who applies those restrictions to their marriage? The individual. The church has no right to apply their beliefs on someone, or anyone, not even their own members. The church has every right to refuse recognition of the marriage, or even kick the people out of the church for going against their beliefs, but they hold absolutely no power over the individual.
As for “empowered by the state,” pastors can marry of course, but in SC, so can a notary public. Religion is completely and entirely optional, people, has been for a long time.
Too long.
if you wanna burn below it sure is your option
I hope they get gay marriage in SC soon. I so want to marry Grand Tango so we can start a family while I’m still young enough.
You don’t have to be married to start a family… you should be but you don’t have to. There are plenty of hetero people out there making babies out of wedlock.
that aint a family and that aint right
Insanity:Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu4k5sTzxIw
I flagged your post as inappropriate because I thought it was an ad for insanity workout videos.
chump
Excellent post.
Jay makes Alvin Greene look disciplined.