The Official Web Site of
Jonas Maxwell
Current Las Vegas Time:
Supporting the God-given freedom America's Founding Fathers fought and died for!
print this page email this page to a friend

Supreme Court Confusion

Categories: OpinionReligion

December 7, 2012

Since the U.S. Supreme Court has chosen to review the issue of "same-sex marriage", the justices are obviously confused with the issue.  I feel it's my moral obligation to sum it up for them by defining these two often-confused and misused terms:

  • Gay Marriage - A marriage in which one or both parties are homosexual.  Despite the parties' sexual "lifestyle", a gay marriage would, by definition, be comprised of one male and one female.  Otherwise, it would not be a marriage since a marriage has been defined for thousands of years as a union between a man and a woman.

  • Same-Sex Marriage - There is no such thing as "same-sex marriage".  It's an oxymoron.  Marriage has been defined for thousands of years as a union between a man and a woman.  Marriage has nothing to do with being gay, straight, homosexual, heterosexual, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, etc.  Any members of any of these groups can wed, so long as the marriage is comprised of one man and one woman.  There are no exceptions for heterosexuals or homosexuals, therefore, there is no discrimination against gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgenders, or any other group claiming discrimination.

What some people in our sick, twisted society are now asking is to eliminate the long-established definition of marriage.  While marriage has always been defined as a union between one man and one woman, the recent push has been to eliminate that requirement against the will of the moral majority.  There is absolutely no valid justification, and certainly no Biblical justification, for doing this.

When God creates something good, when that good is recognized for thousands of years, when some deviants decide to alter that good for their own selfish pleasures, and when we allow this to happen, our moral society is lost.

The Supreme Court should rule that, regardless of the votes of the people of the states, 1) since the primary rule of marriage (one man, one woman) applies equally to both heterosexuals and homosexuals, there is no discrimination against either group, and 2) there is no justification to change the established definition of marriage requiring that the marriage be comprised of one man and one woman.

User Comments:
Jonas - Jun 27, 2013 01:25:36 — Today, the Supreme Court struck down DOMA provision denying benefits to [same-sex] couples.  Apparently, the justices didn't get around to reading this page.  An institution that pre-dates recorded history has been successfully perverted, primarily by gays, for the purpose of material bene ...more
Brenda-Jo - Jun 28, 2013 09:08:34 — I agree with you totally.....

"If you can't say something nice, let's hear it!"   — Joan Rivers

You got something to say about Supreme Court Confusion?

NOTE: A message sent through this form will not be sent privately to Jonas.  It will be posted on this page for the entire world to see.  Any responses will also be posted on this page, and you will not receive personal responses.  If you would like to send a private message to Jonas, send a message through the contact page.  He can ignore it much faster that way. (Just kidding!)


NEXT: Tribute to Dave Wallace, Jr.


kiva - loans that change lives
Kiva - loans that change lives
New Pages


home     media     calendar     faqs     contact

© 2010-2013 Jonas Maxwell. All rights reserved.