Traditional Marriage// the gay/ liberal agenda is trying to eliminate all tradition

I got this comment from my great blogger friend, Euripides, over at the  blog, Self Evident Truths.

Yay for support of marriage. It’s a shame we have to qualify it as “traditional” marriage instead of just marriage. The word marriage should obviously refer to a man and a woman.

When I was responding to comments from that post, I got to thinking about the whole “tradition” thing. I mean, we have only started to use that term recently, when marriage came under attack by the gay rights activists, and all those who mistakenly thought it was a good idea to jump on that bandwagon. So because of all of that ruckus, we now have to use “traditional” marriage, to distinguish between what some refer to as homosexual “marriage,” (I use that term very loosely) and then real marriage, between one man and one woman. So I just decided to look it up, to clarify for myself exactly what we have all been referring to. Not only are we calling it “traditional,” but marriage is a tradition in and of itself. What I found was really interesting.

I came across a paper by Dr. Mark Cooray on Tradition. Here’s what he has to say:

“No more tradition’s chains shall bind us.” This is one of the fundamental ideas of socialist/progressivist thinking. If men and women are freed from tradition, the experiences of history and the family environment, they can be manipulated and used by ideological and religious leaders, eccentrics and maniacs. If tradition declines, ideologues can mould and influence individuals.

That about sums it up right there. That’s what seems to be happening, although I’m taking religious leaders out of that quote. They are trying to remove all tradition, history and the family environment from society, so they can then manipulate us. Kind of explains the gay marriage situation huh? Their agendas definitely fall into the socialist/progressivist way of thinking.

This wide definition, of course, makes it easier to defend the view that human society cannot function in the absence of traditions.

We marriage defenders have been arguing this point all along, however. Society, families and children can not function in the absence of marriage. Check back through my archives and the blogs of  the marriage defenders on my blogroll for proof, studies, explainations and any other info you might need to convince you of this.

The basis of tradition is reason and experience. Experience is perhaps as important or more important than reason. Experience extends beyond reason and mental horizons and embodies factors which people only dimly perceive and cannot rationally explain but which contain elements of truth and understanding, based on accumulated experience.

If tradition is to play its part in human progress, its development must be unimpeded by dictate [government]. Neither “we” nor “they” should dictate tradition.

I love this quote. Dr. Cooray’s paper keeps getting more interesting. So tradition is what it is, we today can’t change it because it was formed in the past and handed down to us. Marriage has always been for a man and a woman. Gays can make something new if they want, which based on the definition, could in the future become their “tradition,” but they can’t mess with marriage. Its not their tradition to change.

So think about this next quote for a sec, and imagine he’s talking about marriage:

As a young person in an eastern environment influenced by western learning, I often decried tradition. I asked for rational explanations, which those who upheld the tradition could not provide. I then ignored and ridiculed the tradition. But years later I came across some explanations which rationalised the tradition. The problem with traditions is that since they have been handed down over a long period of time, the rational bases are either not known by those who uphold them or cannot be lucidly explained. There are often reasons to support traditions but, to the extent that tradition is based on experience and observation, it cannot always be effectively rationalised.

Ok, it makes sense, right? Except that with traditional marriage, we do know the rational basis for it, and it can be lucidly explained. It can also be explained in terms of what would happen if the definition of this sacred union was altered. We have the rationale covered on all fronts. There are benefits to marriage for men, women, children and society as a whole, and there are consequences for all of them if gays are allowed to invade marriage, changing the meaning, and tradition.

The socialist/progressivist attack emanating from academia (and influencing the wider social and political culture) has operated by focusing on the counter-productive aspects of traditional values. These are exaggerated and distorted. The defects are not balanced against the benefits. The intellectual sets up his own view, which he then parades as objective fact or theory. His analysis often proceeds in violation of the basic dynamics of human nature and human interaction. Such analyses do not take account of the existence of other possible viewpoints. The accumulated experience of the ages is discounted.

Here’s why there was a great percentage of college students who voted NO on 8. Marriage and traditional values are being attacked and the benefits ignored. The experience of people for thousands of years is being discounted by the GLBT and liberal activist agenda. I’m sorry, but I don’t think they should have that much say in something that effects all of society, and will also affect every generation to come. They just don’t have that much power in my opinion, and we shouldn’t let them pretend they do.

Traditions develop gradually over centuries and keep on developing – a spiritual and cultural dynamic growing out of the endeavours, sacrifices, experiences and trials (when the cross is rejected) of a people who possess an inborn sense of their ancestry, religion, social customs, language, literature, music, games etc. This way “core values” are established and passed on from father to son/mother to daughter, like name or property, and become a way of life that is both virtuous and enduring.

The parents in each generation build the nation’s traditions into their children’s consciousness, and mental and moral attitudes and actions. Traditions give assurance of continuity and permanence to freedom. If a people neglects or despises traditions, or allows them to be undermined, they will lose their freedom very quickly and easily.

Websters defines “tradition” as:

1. the handing down of statements, beliefs, legends, customs, information, etc., from generation to generation, esp. by word of mouth or by practice: a story that has come down to us by popular tradition.

Generation to generation, marriage has always been between a man and a woman. This has also always been “popular tradition.”

3. a long-established or inherited way of thinking or acting: The rebellious students wanted to break with tradition.

It is what it is. Marriage has been definitely long established; from the beginning of time only men and women have been getting  married.

4. a continuing pattern of culture beliefs or practices.

Yes, I would like traditional marriage to continue. We have definitely established a pattern, or precedent  for marriage. And as the majority of Californians showed with their donations and votes this past November, our cultural beliefs and practices show that marriage is between one man and one woman.

5. The passing down of elements of a culture from generation to generation, especially by oral communication.

“Traditional” marriage is definitely an element of our culture.

6. a. A mode of thought or behavior followed by a people continuously from generation to generation; a custom or usage.

b. A set of such customs and usages viewed as a coherent body of precedents influencing the present

7. a specific practice of long standing

Long standing tradition folks!!! Gays can’t have marriage. They need to find something else. Traditions dating thousands of years can’t and shouldn’t be changed at the whim of some crazies who want to force their ideology on the rest of the world. Traditions, like marriage, are such because they have been around forever, accepted and practiced by society and are part of a culture!, our culture, the world’s culture!!! Marriage is a religious tradition, a cultural tradition and the practice and benefits have been handed down from generation to generation for thousands of years.

Here are quotes from another essay on the importance of tradition:

Tradition, has several key elements. First, it involves some form of ceremonial ritual or ritualistic behavior. Second, tradition involves a group of people; it’s collective and social in nature. Third, traditions have guardians such as historians that have access to the knowledge or the truth of tradition’s sacred rituals. Fourth, tradition stirs emotion within individuals to bring about a greater sense of self-awareness. In some cultures, these rituals are important to one’s self-identity within the context of a larger society.

How does this apply to gays needing, wanting and ranting and raving to marry?

In thinking about the importance of tradition, traditions [in this case marriage] are [is] practiced throughout every civilization known to man.  Tradition is family gathering together for feast and fellowship [or a wedding and reception]. It is a series of rituals that give it greater value and power [marriage is performed through a marriage ceremony]. It is kept alive by guardians who shed light on its true essence or its most basic truths [that would be us, bloggers, writers, activists and members of the DNA]. It is comprised of emotion that helps individuals better understand themselves and their relation to society [so is this why gays want to marry, because they think it will help them better understand themselves and they will have a better relation to society? Marriage does that for men and women who marry and have children, and teach them the importance of families and their role in society.]

We welcome any comments! Thanks for reading!

Sources:

Metronews.com,

websters.com,

ourcivilisation.com Dr. Mark Cooray



Advertisements

8 thoughts on “Traditional Marriage// the gay/ liberal agenda is trying to eliminate all tradition

  1. “Gay marriage” is impossible. Society does not have the ability to redefine marriage because it is not a social construct. It is something that flows from human nature itself.

    Society can’t enable men to marry men or women to marry women any more than we can enable men to turn into ducks or women to turn into geese. Denying people these abilities is not a matter of fairness or equal access. We simply do not have the ability.

    Human nature leads to sex, which leads to offspring, which leads to the reality of childrearing, which leads to marriage an institution found in every human culture and understood in terms of man and woman.

  2. What a great posting on the ideal of tradition. That is the hallmark of conservatism: to conserve those things that are traditional which are tried and true, which give meaning to live, and which connect with beliefs in a better way.

  3. This is an excellent post. I agree wholeheartedly that some things are hard to defend because they seem like common sense. How can you justify common sense?

  4. Let’s stop calling them gay “rights” activists, too. They claim rights where none exist. I will just be calling them gay activists from now on.

    Tradition is a wonderful thing. Thank you for posting this, Journalista.

  5. Pearl,

    Thanks for your comment. I completely agree with you about taking the “rights” out of gay activists. It’s interesting how they just get this insane stuff ingrained in people. Kind of like how they’re trying to take over marriage. I just posted on Obama’s plan for the GLBT community, super scary. Apparently our new president thinks they are lacking in the civil rights department. I don’t think so…

  6. Thanks Emissary. Exactly. Why can’t they just pick another name and start their own deal. Marriage isn’t theirs to take. How arrogant for the GLBT community to think that they that they can destroy and change something that was established by God and has been here for thousands of years.

  7. Very eloquently put Euripides. Thanks for commenting. That’s one thing I love about conservatism! We put value in the religious influences that helped build this country, we recognize and appreciate tradition and see that it does add value to this society. We see value in the moral way our ancestors conducted their lives and in the integrity with which elected officials served their governments. Over Christmas break I watched the mini-series “John Adams” on DVD with my family. He was an incredible man and should be an inspiration to our elected officials today. I can’t even imagine some of the conversations and points of view that John Adams had, taking place in Obama’s office. Integrity and morality used to play a huge role in government, it’s incredibly sad that is not the case today.

  8. Thanks Secular! Well put! What part of “they can’t reproduce” don’t they understand? Homosexuality is un-natural, they are not meant to marry and they have no way to further their species. Except gay isn’t a species. They are men and women just like everyone else. So they should not be entitled to a special set of laws, rules, and concessions. Although they think they should.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s