Earlier today, the Radical Republican party was criticized in a formal post. Not foreign to such accusations of stubbornness and narrow mindedness, the Radical Republican is once again subject to defending their beliefs that marriage between two sodomites is intrinsically evil.
Defending the Radical Republican movement at WHS is two of the leaders: Atulya Prateek and Glen Maganzini.
Radical Republican Movement: Narrow minded? It is called standing up for and backing your beliefs. So, believing in anything wrong or right is stubborn? That doesn't make too much sense. Deep prejudice? Gay marriage is heretical. You can not say that we are being heretics, look at the sodomites! Opinions will be opinions. Thoughts will be thoughts. The path of moral correctness has no gays in it.
Religion, yes, is based on interpretation, but only to some extent. Religion and marriage are intertwined to a very deep extent. The prophets who wrote the Bible were intellects; they were the most brilliant.
Celebrating love? What celebration does a married couple achieve if they don't reproduce?
Gay marriage is gross and disgusting; it should be banned. Grown men displaying affection (holding hands, kissing) is wrong.
Why do we bother with such an issue as gay marriage? It is actually quite simple. We are vehemently against it!
"Marriage does involve very personal feelings, but this does not mean that it is merely a private matter. Whether it succeeds or fails, a marriage has a huge impact on the couple, their children, those around them, and the entire society. As an institution, marriage is the business of everyone in society. It takes more than emotion to hold a marriage together, as we have seen. - Catholic Answers"
And I leave you with two other quotes that sum up our views on gay marriage from the same source:
The institution of marriage is precious. It enhances the health, longevity, and well-being of married couples. It increases the health, vocational success, and emotional well-being of children. In providing all these benefits, heterosexual marriage contributes to the happiness and prosperity of society. Marriage must, therefore, remain limited to one man and one woman who strive to keep their marriage exclusive, unconditional, permanent, and life-giving. Nothing less will ever meet the needs of the human person, because nothing less satisfies.On a final note: name calling does not win arguments. Calling us stubborn bigots and homophobes only proves that you are dismissing the argument at hand.
Because it is intrinsically disordered, we must not recognize homosexual activity as legitimate, and we must not give public approval to homosexual marriage because of the harm that will do to the institution of marriage and because of the social harm that will result from emptying marriage of its meaning. Perhaps the most serious social harm would be to children: the children of divorce and the children of same-sex couples, who will suffer all the ills we have discussed.