Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Public Records | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Gay marriage media bias?

April 5, 2013

To the editor: Has The Journal now joined the left wing media bias in support of gay marriage? Over a week has passed since the upper front page article on a couple’s lawsuit against CA’s Propositio......

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Apr-05-13 7:39 PM

Saying polygamy and ********** will come next is the sign of desperation. Just ask Congressman Gomert, who can map a path from gun control to **********. Maybe even from raising tax rates.

The website link is the Family Research Council which says marriage has been badly weakened by decades of divorce, out-of-wedlock childbearing and cohabitation. They support adoption as an alternative to single parenthood. That slippery slope may be right here... Single parents are not in a marriage – is that really the best place for the child? Should divorce be legal? “ And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries a divorced woman, commits adultery.” Where will it end?

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-05-13 7:45 PM

The listed harmful effects are pure conjecture. That study mentioned was done from 1984 to 1996. Gay marriage became legal in the Netherlands in 2001. There were no married partners in the study, which was in fact a study of steady and casual relationships on the spread of HIV. Monogamous couples were excluded from the study. Participants were no older than 30, chosen from HIA/AIDS clinic rosters in metropolitan Amsterdam.

Who would accept the average length of the relationships of heterosexual unmarried men with STD’s or drug use, under 30, in New York City, as being representative of all heterosexual men?

Those guys did average much better than Kim Kardashian’s traditional marriage though.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-05-13 8:48 PM

Myron is the perfect foil for the bigots.

Nicely done!

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 12:09 AM

The fourth paragraph is superb.

He is being facetious, isn't he?

Isn't he?!

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 9:49 AM

KARE 11 Land of 10k stories: Lesbian couple from the 70's, fighting for equal rights. One partner handicapped from accident, other partner not able to legally care for partner. Decade battle: "I just want to bring my partner, that I love, home". Then, wins and can bring partner home. This is where it gets interesting-healthy partner starts another relationship with another woman. Now, all 3 live together, just want equal rights. And I quote the story: "if I was legally married, I wouldn't have started another relationship". WOW, that's the love and devotion that is a poster for equal rights (they've been recognized nationally for decades!). I really lost respect for that cause when they're the poster. Sorry, but this story is out there, look it up.

5 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 10:42 AM

Oh, listen to the heathens whine. Well said, Myron.

2 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 10:44 AM

How long until 14 year old girls can get married link in Thailand?

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 10:44 AM


1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 2:54 PM

If KARE reported on every incidence of marital infidelity or messed up relationships of nonmarried, or married, heterosexual couples there wouldn't be time for any other news. Sorry, but if you've not lost respect for tradtional marriage for the same reason, you're expecting more of gay couples than straight.

5 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 3:12 PM

Allowing more people to enjoy marriage will result in less people getting and staying married? Makes perfect sense. (Intense sarcasm). Please, please show me one way that allowing others to marry will in anyway affect heterosexual marriages. There isn't one. That argument is crap.

And Michael- Muslim and Mormon weddings ARE recognized legally. Are you referring to plural marriage? You know there is a difference, right? And the comments about animals and 14 year olds- This legislation is about two consenting adults. What is so hard about that for some of you to understand? The "slippery slope" argument is crap too.

No one is hurt by gay marriage and to pretend that you will be is shameful. If gay relationships are distasteful to you, so be it. People's rights should not be based on what your personal biases are. Why don't you put your efforts into doing something that will help your fellow citizens instead of fighting to hurt them?

9 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 3:30 PM

Is there some problem with Mitt’s marriage?

Seriously, are Morman and Muslim marriages between two unrelated consenting persons of legal age not recognized by all 50 states? Are they not given all the legal rights afforded to married couples in all 50 states? Correct me if I'm wrong, but unless both of the persons are the same sex, the answer is yes.

Those favoring polygamy or marriage to a child, a dog, a lamp or all of the above could go to court and ask for “equal marriage rights” if gay marriage becomes law; but they always could have done so. Those eager to incorporate elements of Sharia law could and may do so. Those eager to incorporate other religion’s laws could and may do so also.

2 unrelated consenting persons of legal age. Why assume those who support that definition would support every other claim? Would you?

6 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 3:32 PM

MT you're so impatient! I didn't think you'd insult me until I responded.

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 4:04 PM

You do know that marriage is a legal contract. In order to get married you need to be able to give consent legally and dogs, cats, etc cannot do that.

Not sure why this would lead to polygamy either.

Also if someone else's marriage is going to cause problems in your marriage, you need to re-evaluate your marriage.

I suppose people like Donald Trump, Newt Gingrich are great examples of "traditional marriage".

8 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 4:37 PM

You can put lipstick on a pig and it will still be a pig. Two dudes getting hitched, regardless of whether one of them is wearing lipstick, will never be a real marriage.

7 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 5:13 PM

MIT: So, is there something wrong with social acceptability? Seems to me it's a pretty basic human need. Would you like to be banned from this site for your pompous pronouncements? No, of course not. It would be hurtful. Just like the word "bigot" makes you squirm.

And, "gay marriage" and "silencing Christianity" don't even belong in the same sentence. Christianity has nothing to do with the right to marriage.

In one post on another thread you demand greater personal freedom and less government, in the this post you want the narrowest of religious definitions to be law, and the restriction of personal freedom curtailed by the government.

There's a word for how you are behaving, MIT. It begins with an "h".

6 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 5:17 PM

Well, we got a little excited there.

Try: ...and the restriction of personal freedom ENFORCED by the government.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 9:13 PM

Where is the line where one type of immoral behavior is considered unacceptable by the law and another is given a free pass? I don't give a crap what two people choose to do in their houses, but where does it end?

6 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 10:08 PM

The pro gay people won't stop until the government forces every priest or pastor to choose between marrying gays or quitting their jobs.

10 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-13 11:02 PM

MIT: Look at your post that begins, "You cannot take..."

...and where the words "homosexual behavior" are included, just delete them, and in their place insert "racial equality".

You will then begin to understand what you sound like to the MAJORITY of the citizens of the United States of America.

Read your own words, MIT. I'm embarrassed for you.

7 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-07-13 1:05 PM

The "what might happen next" argument is nothing new. It was used for years to prohibit people of different races from marrying. Just like then the argument today is baseless.

It does point out however, how desperate those opposing same sex marriage have become. If that is the best they can come up with it only strengthens the case for same-sex marriage.

6 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-07-13 5:58 PM

Eagles Fan- either you are not paying attention or you are buying into the lies put out there to scare you. No one will be forcing churches to do anything. They will be free to discriminate all they want. Marriage is NOT a religious institution. You don't need a church/religion to get married. Even if you get married in a church, you still need a license through the government.

6 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-07-13 7:21 PM


The mention of polygamy in the debate about same sex marriage is at best a non sequitur.

The inference that one would somehow lead to the other is completely flawed.

Has any of the nine states that currently allow same sex marriage also permit polygamous marriages ?

7 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-07-13 7:43 PM

We all knew that The Journal was secretly hiding it's left wing bias by daily printing it's right wing editorials. It has finally come to light that The Journal is run by aging ex-hippie law school flunkys who failed to make a living selling organic tomatoes and solar toilets. They knew they could never sell papers to the old German folk if their true identity was ever disclosed.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-07-13 9:41 PM

Gay marriage cheapens the sanctacy of marriage. It is about as cheap as a Vegas wedding in a drive up chapel. Divorce also cheapens the sancticy of marriage, with some exceptions.

Bottom line, this country is losing its moral values fast. Corporate greed, lazyness, abortion used like cheap birth control, plan B, and now this, it seems that anything goes.

10 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-08-13 9:27 AM

Farley is not only a ordained minister, but also a devout Christian, and he is truly open minded. I took this quote because I thought it was a great example of what more members of the clergy should be saying.

"Marriage is not a religious act. It's a contract, like a merger of Two companies. I am ordained and can perform marriages in the US legally and i am not registered to any particular religion. Live and let live. It doesn't get more spiritual than that. Lets not forget a time when interracial marriage was illegal. although we don't agree with something does not give us the right for it to be illegal. If you want to talk religion any sin is punishable by death. Oh adultery is even if you aren't married yet, or divorced and marry someone else. In religion all sin is the same as murder.Oh by the way the thought of*****is adultery also. There is no small sin. so only the pure will get into heaven.(no one is pure and without sin).

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 162 comments Show More Comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web