[LibertarianLiz]

For years, I have been stating, here and elsewhere, that if there is nothing special about marriage being between one man and one woman; then, what is so special about the number two.

This whole "gay" marriage thing is really about the destruction of marriage as a bedrock institution of our society. The polygymists are next. Group "marriages", hey, why not.

If the meaning of marriage is what the popular culture of the moment says it is, then it means nothing. Once redefined, it will be redefined again and again, removing all meaning from the word marriage.

[stephenjohnbanker]

” If the meaning of marriage is what the popular culture of the moment says it is, then it means nothing. Once redefined, it will be redefined again and again, removing all meaning from the word marriage. “

There is already a 44 year old man who wants to marry his 18 year old daughter (not his by blood, but by marriage)

[Monorprise]

Your right, but i don’t think you need to redefine marriage beyond ‘gay marriage’ to lose its effective meaning as a child centered institution.

You cross the reproductive barrier and marriage as a family centered union is over. Their ‘marriage’ will just becomes a contract of entitlement and conveniences which will inevitably be treated as such.

Anyone who says legal ‘marriage’ is about love is living in a modern cultural dilution state, that compromises the very union they profess to be ‘committed’ to. Many marriages were loveless many that way from the start historically.