Sen. Perry Files Bill to Protect Traditional Marriage

Where are the bills improving education, health care, consumer protection, worker safety and roads for Texans Senator Perry?

I get that this debate comes down to Christian beliefs, and I am morally opposed to my church sanctioning these unions. However, as a veteran of the USAF I find it sickening that the equality, freedom and justice for all citizens that I fought for is being squashed, and with such hatred. I would not want my govt to always agree with my church, and I love God and country, gay marriage should be legal.

Out of all the liberties and rights you claim the President is taking away from us, this is the most pressing? What a waste of time and money on something the Supreme Court will likely decide. Our roads are crumbling and water is drying up, and you worry that a couple of men or women will end your marriage? Get over your self.

I agree they should be able to WEDLOCK to receive the benefits that I receive but only if marriage is not in the title. Just use wedlock and move on and enjoy the benefits. And yes Christians sin all the time every day. But our sins are that we work towards not doing them over and over. So try using it under the term of wedlock it may pass.

Why does it matter what it is called Donald? Why can't same-sex couples have a marriage like anyone else? I have heard people use that line before and have never been able to explain it.

Why not take away no fault divorce and instate punishments for adultery? That would be traditional. The story you published recently about the young, attractive (if you like blonds) woman who allegedly chose an adolescent over her husband (and any other adults of legal age she could have taken as lovers) highlights changes that have taken place in the deep undercurrents of our culture.

I'd like to draft a bill, outlining the sanctity of "brunch", defining and expectantly preserving it as one man, three women, an accordion player and 2 monkeys.

I don't believe this will particularly benefit anyone or change anything for the better, I'm just that f'ing full of myself....and oh yeah, my invisible boogeyman (who hates all the same people I do) agrees with me.

Ok, so the fanatical want to chase after and monopolize intangible and subjective social contrivances....let them have at it. Considering some of the more intrusive acts these types are capable of, this idle BS is a worthwhile distraction.

I get it though, when lacking anything of substance, a politician can always play into something as trivial as the paraphobic fears of their constituents.

“Pragmatically speaking, I like the fact that the masses vote, abuse drugs, believe in Jesus, follow sports, and worship a flag. They are tools of social engineering that keep the many-too-many sedate, pacified, and out of many people's hair (chiefly, my own).”
― Matt Paradise,

With this otherwise pointless bill, Perry is almost certainly attempting to give his constituency the impression that he is actually doing something worthwhile with his position. But I don't believe that the subject addressed is trivial. Marriage and the dynamics of family life are issues that indicate the present health of our society as well as the type of society that we will become in the future... And if we're going to consider the topic, we should realize that it does no good to peg gays with any kind of blame for problems with traditional marriage. They have nothing to do with it.

If anything, that these kinds of ploys have any effect on their intended targets shows how oppressively daft many traditionalists are at interpreting even the most shrewish signals the real nature of the issue reveals to them. And that may be something that no amount of admonition, social reinforcement, or legislative spells against (as Perry calls them) "addictive" homosexual relationships can fix. Nothing to do then but, like pale Shiva, rest our heads on Kali's ample black thighs and remember that all is fair in love and war...

The 1st Amendment prohibits the establishment of a religion by our government, and clearly this is an attempt to establish Sen Perry's religious beliefs as the law of the land. It is a straight up violation of the Constitution, not to mention a huge waste of time and effort. My 26 year marriage to a woman isn't diminished by two men marrying each other, it's none of my business or anybody else's. The world would be a lot better place if the government ignored what goes on between consenting adults.

While Perry is defending traditional marriage where are his proposals to end divorce except in cases of infidelity, and to prohibit remarriage after a divorce? I thought so.