4th view - not a big deal
Simple solution to the same sex marriage question...
Let ‘em get married after they produce offspring with their partner...and if they don’t accomplish that in 24 months it’s the guillotine for ‘em both! Either that, or toss into a pit full of burning sulfur (brimstone)...if it was good for Sodom, it’s good for them!
Certainly describes Ron Paul.
“That government should recognize an institution in one move and then redefine it in another is an unacceptable encroachment on a religious institution.”
The definition of marriage the state uses is simply whatever judges, pols, or the majority thinks it can be at any one time. That is how the state decides, recognizes, and defines things. It was always a danger, Pope Leo XIII was warning about what would happen if folks started to rely upon the state to define the institution of marriage 130 years ago.
“But it is okay for the government to become entangled with marriage towards the end of promoting marriage. The institution is good. It tames men. It protects women. It is good for children. Therefore, it is worth promoting.”
Live by the sword, die by the sword. The state’s involvement hasn’t been too good for the institution, at least going by those goals in the modern era. If the goal was to condition folks to think marriage is just another lousy gubberment contract that can be broken and resumed between anyone as long as the state says it can, and thus create broken families who end up being reliant on the state, well it’s closer to that than to anything beneficial, in my opinion.
Freegards
I predict that the push to allow polygamy will come from another group - Muslims. A current favorite “victim” group of the Left.