[Jaysun]

Since marriage has been effectively dead for at least 30 years, what is it about this word in conjunction with homosexuals that caused the liberal propaganda machine to take a detour?


This is just my opinion, but I think that the answer is two fold. First, the word "marriage" conjures up the thought of traditional marriage. Second, and more importantly, the idea of homosexual marriage didn't catch on so they changed the name to civil unions (it had to be something) and started to seek the same status as married couples.

[longtermmemmory]

But what is the silver bullet argument to kill off civil unions the same as homosexual marriages became a "no go"?

[ArGee]

the idea of homosexual marriage didn't catch on so they changed the name to civil unions

The part that is confusing me is why it "didn't catch on."

In thinking about this last night I was able to crystallize my confusion more.

If there is no moral dimension to marriage, then there is no reason not to change its definition to include homosexual marriage.

If there is a moral dimension to marriage then it's the same moral dimension there is to sex. You can't stand on a moral judgement of marriage without an accompanying moral judgement of sex.

People appear to be demanding the former without demanding the latter, and I can't figure out why.

Shalom.