- Facebook’s Instant Articles not a threat to media
- U of I expert: Rauner’s pension fix ‘unconstitutional’
- State Senate approves lesser penalties for marijuana possession
- State Roundup: Natural gas vehicle tax stalls in committee
- Raptors, Rangers FC announce June camp
- Student debt 101: dearth of data fuels common misperceptions
- ‘Millionaire tax’ clears House panel
- Memorial Day events at Midway’s LZ Peace Memorial
- Wallace calls for Rockford crime task force
- How we discovered the 3 revolutions of American pop
Changing definitions of marriage
Gay marriage is what we all pray our marriage will be until death.
Homosexual marriage, however, has been called an abomination by many in the Christian church.
Why the media continue to use gay as a definition of homosexuality has always made me wonder. If I were homosexual and proud of it, I certainly would be proud of the established definition of such homosexuality. Marriage is defined as a Holy Sacrament of the Catholic religion. Who is the government to think they can define religious definitions? Our Constitution provides protections against government forming religion. When government changes definitions, they are performing a change. Civil unions are on the way to allow homosexual unions with the same government benefits of marriage. Why does no one call for homosexual marriage? Could it be that homosexuals are ashamed of the definition of their choices? Sorry, but when I am gay and fun loving, it does not include my sexual preference.
Daniel Robert Smyth
From the March 27-April 2, 2013, issue