Visionaries,
My question and concern is this. If we stop imposing a particular religious view through the mechanism of civil law (which is, we agree, what our current laws amount to), and if we do this for the sake of allowing homosexual marriage, what logical reason do we have for stopping there? We suddenly cannot arbitrarily reimpose the religious view we just rejected (for the sake of limiting marriages to two persons). Your interest may be limited to the allowance of homosexual marriages, but those responsible for the law over the entire society have to keep in the front of their minds that there are other requests/demands that will be made almost immediately. And the polygamists will be near the head of the line of those making them.
Cordially,
Douglas Wilson
Apologetics in the Void” are repostings from an on-going electronic discussion and debate I had some time ago with members of our local community, whose names I have changed. The list serve is called Vision 20/20, and hence the name “visionaries.” Reading just these posts probably feels like listening to one half of a phone conversation, but I don’t feel at liberty to publish what others have written. But I have been editing these posts (lightly) with intelligibility in mind.