Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Stew
So gay marriage is too exclusory? Not marriage in general?
|
Exactly - but that notion escapes most. I mean the definition of marriage has been changing since it was invented. As late as 1967 or so, the definition of traditional marriage excluded interracial marriages, as against God. But, that changed, thanks to the Supreme Court. So, to argue that it is an affront to the definition of marriage is preposterous.
Also, I could care a less if polygamy exists, etc. As long as there are consenting adults, I could care a less. I also think that brothers and sisters as well as cloe kin present a problem because the baby could be harmed via genetics. So, there is a valid, non religious reason for excluding that. But, if there is a way around that, I could care a less if brothers and sisters marry.
In the end, marriage should not be in any law book other than the consent issue.