[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

There are natural law arguments against homosexual "marriage," it's just that Bill isn't familiar with them. And if Bill isn't familiar with the arguments, they don't exist.

Most opponents of homosexual "marriage" are Christians, have faith in the Bible or the Church, and don't require natural law arguments to be convinced.

Still, it's a simple case to make. Marriage is a lifetime commitment between a man and a woman, for their mutual good, and for the begetting and raising of children.

The purpose of homosexual "marriage" is... what? A lifetime relationship? How is that different from friendship? Sodomy? That's "marriage"? So people are "married" to whoever they sodomize? The phrase "homosexual marriage" is nonsensical, like "square circle."

[Intolerant in NJ]

Still, it's a simple case to make. Marriage is a lifetime commitment between a man and a woman...it is simple as long as you can keep it within the religious domain - but it seems to me that the implications of what gays are pushing for haven't become obvious yet to a lot of them - even if they do manage to get governemt to approve "marriage" for them, this will not require churches to allow them to marry, and what the government can approve is really only certain legalistic rights like access to social security payments and the like - it will be a hollow victory for many of them if they still can't participate in the sanctity and spirituality of the traditional ceremony and institution.....