Defending The Sanctity Of Marriage

Experimental Theology shared this eloquent speech by New York State Senator Diane Savino and I had to share it. Many of the points made have been made before, but I’ve rarely if ever heard them made as succinctly, as clearly, as powerfully, and as entertainingly in a single short video.

YouTube Preview Image

  • Anonymous

    Savino for Governor! Wow.

  • Anonymous

    I truely feel sorry for you. Maybe some day you will see the truth.

  • Anonymous

    Please visit Senator Diane Savino’s website:http://www.nysenate.gov/senator/diane-j-savinoand her facebook page:http://www.facebook.com/SenatorDianeSavino

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/17693944542336729866 Anthony

    Wow, that was totally awesome!

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/05792458157352244029 Solly Gratia

    Brilliant, thanks for posting that. I vote aye, too. (Or I would, if I was in the US)

  • benjdm

    I watched the vote live on TV. It was so disappointing.

  • Anonymous

    because my husband disagrees with me, and i do desire to honor him, i will write my opinion annon….i don't know why the religious think they always speak for god…it is appalling what these will do and what they think of others that do not believe the way they do. that is the appalling thing. that christians can be so ungracious!

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/12509596389764649667 Jay

    Mat 19:5 and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? Mat 19:6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate." Hmm.. I think we need to first ask what the nature of this sacred union is really. Does this “sacred” union automatically include the regulation of the governments too? Is a civil union “sacred”? Is the union of a couple stating their promises to each other in front of a “clergy” person any more sacred than the couple doing the same before a judge or a clerk? There is no prescription in the Bible as to how a marriage between two people should happen, but here we have the words attributed to Jesus saying that God is the joiner. So when and how this divine joining happens remains a bit of a mystery to me. Marriage? It is about sex, but not only about sex. It is about love and commitment, but not only. I think we would do well to not oversimplify the nature of loving relationships between people. This whole things starts to get a bit weird if you really sit back and think about it. Are two girl friends living together, sharing their lives in so many ways, holding each other’s hands, hugging each other considered just best friends as long as they don’t touch each other’s sexual organs? Is it really so simple? I think not. Would it not be a lot easier if we made it possible for any two or more people to have any legally binding contract like marriage (call it marriage or call it something else) and then let the sacred stuff be left to the religious folk according to how their religious communities wanted to define it and implement it? I don’t think it is wise or necessary to impose the civil laws of marriage on the religious communities nor the marriage laws of the religious communities upon the civil law.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/17693944542336729866 Anthony

    I was saddened by the outcome of the vote. Even more so when they later asked one of the senators (who also is a preacher) why he voted against allowing gay marriage and his response was essentially that he cannot check his Christianity at the door and that he cannot separate his religion from his politics.My retort, "get the hell out of office then!"

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/01350640852962668641 Gary

    It's not possible for a religious person to check religion at the door. It's not a Sunday morning only thing.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/14247799389009268470 James Pate

    Diane Savino is certainly nice to look at!

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/02561146722461747647 James F. McGrath

    Gary, I don't disagree. But it is also possible for such a person to understand that their role as legislator is not to impose their religion on others – that indeed such is prohibited by the Constitution. It is one thing to live one's convictions every day of the week, quite another to try to use the law to force people who do not share your beliefs to be forced nonetheless to comply with them.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X