Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: BMiles2112

I don't think the state should be involved in endorsing any relationship whatsoever, but my poiint was that those who are arguing for selective endorsement on the basis of children are being horribly inconsistent, and well as more than a little foolish (and irrelevant) in light of contemporary culture.


84 posted on 07/13/2004 12:56:42 PM PDT by The Green Goblin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies ]


To: The Green Goblin

Where have I been inconsistent?


87 posted on 07/13/2004 1:06:04 PM PDT by BMiles2112
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]

To: The Green Goblin
.. but my poiint was that those who are arguing for selective endorsement on the basis of children are being horribly inconsistent, and well as more than a little foolish (and irrelevant) in light of contemporary culture.

1. The raising of well adjusted, moral, productive citizens is neither foolish nor irrelevant in any culture, no matter how contemporary.

2. Broad rules that protect the institution of marriage may fail the consitancy check in some cases. That does not invalidate the need for marriage, or for its protection.

3. Gay marriage is unproductive every time, and thus does not warrant special protection.

89 posted on 07/13/2004 1:20:36 PM PDT by Steel Wolf (What? Bread AND circuses, ... for free?!?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson