What Will Redefining Marriage Entail?

Monday, 08 Apr 2013 10:40 AM

By Michael Reagan

  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
|  A   A  
  Copy Shortlink
I was on the Piers Morgan show recently being lectured by Piers for my comments on same-sex marriage. What I had done was simply repeat the same questions that are being raised in courtrooms across the land, including the Supreme Court.
Specifically, I asked where does the redefinition of marriage stop? In the future will the federal government be asked to extend the redefinition to include polygamy and bestiality?

In fact, I specifically asked Piers if it is okay for a bisexual to marry one man and one woman? He loves them both and liberals contend he is unable to change his sexual orientation. I would say it brings a whole new definition to the term “splitting the difference,” but Piers refused to give me any answer at all. Which is standard for same-sex marriage supporters. They refuse to follow the path to its logical conclusion.

This is not idle or extremist speculation.

In 1969, in the wake of New York’s Stonewall Riots, if a conservative had asked if homosexual men will demand to marry other men as part of their demand for equal rights, the media and homosexual activists would have labeled conservatives as crazy alarmists! Yet here we are in 2013 being told it is bigotry and hate not to approve of same-sex marriage.

Once America starts basing law on feelings, rather than facts, there is literally no limit. If the love of one homosexual for another is the driving force behind the complete redefinition of the institution of marriage, then how can the state say a man who loves more than one woman should be refused the right to marry more than one woman?
Is he to be penalized because he has too much love? Is there a discount rate on love if it is spread over more than one female? And how about the brother who says he is in love with his sister? Or the first cousins who want to marry? Or the father and daughter who want to marry after the death of the mother? And since according to same-sex marriage advocates all love is equal and deserves equal treatment, why is there an age limit on love?

Where exactly does this end? Same-sex marriage advocates refuse to answer these questions, because if they are intellectually consistent and true to their cause, the answers show approval of same-sex marriage is dangerous for society as a whole.

Marriage has been limited to one man and one woman for thousands of years for a reason: Marriage was defined, established, and blessed by God. Man should be wary of tampering with an institution ordained by our creator.

Michael Reagan is the son of President Ronald Reagan. He is the founder and chairman of The Reagan Group and president of The Reagan Legacy Foundation. Read more reports from Michael Reagan — Click Here Now.

© Mike Reagan

  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Copy Shortlink
Around the Web
Join the Newsmax Community
>> Register to share your comments with the community.
>> Login if you are already a member.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Retype Email:
Zip Code:
Hot Topics
Follow Newsmax
Like us
on Facebook
Follow us
on Twitter
Add us
on Google Plus
Around the Web
You May Also Like

New Laws Unleash Pot Entrepreneurs

Friday, 18 Apr 2014 12:21 PM

Colorado — the home of legalized marijuana — is experiencing a birth of stoner entrepreneurs. Or maybe that should be en . . .

Pa. Can't Afford to Lose Gov. Corbett

Thursday, 17 Apr 2014 13:33 PM

Be careful, Pennsylvania people. You can't afford to blow it this fall. Your great state is, I'm sorry to say, already n . . .

Overtaxed Californians Feel the Pinch

Wednesday, 16 Apr 2014 10:40 AM

Columnists live for the day when they have a simple, clear-cut, and reasonable answer to a problem vexing fellow America . . .

Newsmax, Moneynews, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, NewsmaxWorld, NewsmaxHealth, are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
©  Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved