God intended for marriage to be between a man and a woman
Q: You say that you're against gay marriage, and that government should be removed from the marriage license business.
But if churches may decide individually what are their rules for marriage, won't some churches allow gay marriage?
A:
God intended for marriage to be between a man and a woman. However, there is nothing stopping˙churches from marrying˙gays today, which has happened many times over the years --without most of us knowing or caring.
This˙is not to say I support gay church weddings,˙I simply want the government to get out of the marriage licensing business. And, I do not want to be forced to subsidize or sanction their˙behavior.
1st amendment prohibits government from regulating marriage
Q: Would you push for laws to ban marriage even in churches that choose to define marriage as any two adults? Or would you allow churches to freely choose their own definition of marriage, even if that allows gay marriage?
A: I do not support churches marrying gays, but the 1st amendment prohibits the government from regulating church issues.˙
Therefore, I would not support any legislation that regulated church marriages,˙church building programs, church political activities, charitable activities etc. If we fix our tax system to adhere to the
Constitution, there would be˙no need for special tax benefits for married heterosexuals either because there would be no tax on our incomes.
Government should stay out of employment decisions
Q: Do you support or oppose the policy: "Require companies to hire more women and minorities"?
A: DO NOT SUPPORT--unless outright discrimination is happening in the workplace, the government should stay out of employment decisions.
Source: Email interview on 2008 Senate race with OnTheIssues.org
Jun 22, 2008
No special consideration for homosexuals
Q: Do you support or oppose the policy: "Sexual orientation should be protected by civil rights law"?
A: DO NOT SUPPORT--there are already numerous protections against discrimination.
As long as homosexuals are not asking for special rights or consideration, we should let them live out their lives any way they choose.
Source: Email interview on 2008 Senate race with OnTheIssues.org
Jun 22, 2008
Let churches define marriage without government involvement
If a particular church wants to break all the rules and make a mockery of the natural order of things, where men procreate with women, there is no need for us to get all shook up over it--just as long as we aren't forced to sanction or subsidize their
behavior. The First Amendment applies equally--and particularly--to those who hold religious beliefs we may not agree with.
NO MARRIAGE LICENSE + NO TAX BREAKS + NO GOVERNEMNT CONTROL = NOBODY CARES! Why does everything have to be done the hard way?
Source: Campaign website, www.davebrownlow.com, "Key_Issues"
Jun 21, 2008
Separate Marriage & State: let churches marry whom they want
"Gay" Marriage--A Call for the Separation of Marriage and State: We have spent way, waaaaay too much time worrying about this one. Marriage was intended to be a church issue--it's defined in the Bible, not the Constitution, so why should we need a
government license to engage in something GOD ordained?
As usual, we waste a massive amount of effort fighting the symptom rather than trying to figure out what is causing the problem--which is that whatever we let the government license, the governmen
will also regulate. Is it any wonder this has turned into a total circus? The proper solution is to get the government completely out of the marriage licensing business and let the churches handle it.
Scripture, common sense, as well as the anatomic
realities, makes it undeniably clear that men were designed to procreate with women. (Well, duh!) However, if a particular church wants to break the rules & make a mockery of the natural order of things, there is no need to get all shook up over it.
Source: Campaign website, www.davebrownlow.com, "Key_Issues"
Jun 21, 2008
