Defending Marriage, After Massachusetts: What the Court Did and How We Should Respond

National Catholic Register ^ | November 30 - December 6, 2003 | EVE TUSHNET

[TKDietz]

Judge not lest ye be judged.

[GregoryFul]

It is an opinion, not a judgement!

[TKDietz]

No, it's also judgment. You adjudged me immoral because you believe that my opinion regarding gay marriage or civil unions between same sax couples is immoral. You have a right to your opinion, judgmental as it may be. Personally, I found your statement quite offensive and the "judge not" comment was something I typed in quickly after I deleted the comment I almost posted that wasn't nearly as nice.

Just because someone doesn't believe that there must be laws against everything you find morally reprehensible does not mean that they are immoral. Is someone immoral if they believe smoking, drinking or gambling should remain legal? Is it immoral to believe that it should be legal to practice other religions? Is it immoral to believe in freedom of speech even if some of that speech may be the kind you believe to be sinful? Is it immoral to believe in freedom of association?

I do not advocate people living a gay lifestyle. I personally believe that it is an unhealthy learned behavior. I am not against gay marriage or some sort of civil union that for at least legal purposes is similar to marriage because even though I may not approve of the gay lifestyle, the reality is that it will exist whether you or I like it or not. Since I know this to be the case, I would rather that laws encourage monogamy for gays so that they spread less disease. Moreover, out of a sense of fairness to some extent but mainly for practical reasons it makes sense to me that within the legal system we treat gay "married" couples like we treat other married couples so we don't have to have different sets of rules resulting in complex litigation tyeing up courts, resulting in inequity and worse, in people taking the law into their own hands because they have no adequate remedy through the court system.

If you want to call me immoral for having such "sinful" thoughts, please be my guest.

[GregoryFul]

Where do you draw the line? Why not provide a legally sanctioned "marital" association between people and pets, or adults and children, or groups of people. How about prostitution - should that be made legal in all states? Why not 1 hour "marriages".

Your argument that gay marriage ought to be legal because gay unions exists is specious. Laws exist to inhibit socially harmful behaviors that people engage in.

Gay sex is socially and individually harmful. That has been known to cultures for many thousands of years -- the knowledge codified as "sinful" behavior. And those who do not stand against sinful behavior, as immoral. How come we are so smart that we can discard this long legacy from our forbearers?

[TKDietz]

Personally, I'd draw the line before letting adults marry children or animals or multiple partners. But look, we could go around and around on this forever and I won't convince you to change your mind and you won't convince me. I'm tired of your insults and I'm not going to waste another second arguing with you. Let's just agree to disagree and be done with it.