It seems to me that general debates about same-sex marriage aren't quite
on-topic for this list, unless one can tie them with some specificity to
the law of government and religion. I think such debates are quite
interesting; I just hosted one this week and two weeks before on my
blog; but they seem to me to be off-topic here.
Eugene
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Brayton
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2005 11:10 PM
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: Social Notes from All Over
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Duncan
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2005 6:26 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Social Notes from All Over
It seems to me that inviting people to dinner is totally
unrelated to supporting a radical re-definition of marriage. The one is
socially decent, the other would be totally destructive of a great
institution.
I continue to be baffled by this claim. I fail to see how the
institution of marriage can be destroyed without having any actual
marriage damaged in any conceivable way. It's not going to do anything
to any marriage that I'm aware of. No one I know is going to leave their
spouse if gay marriage is legalized, or stop loving their kids, or
choose not to get married. If anyone's marriage is fragile enough that
it can damaged by the prospect of people they don't know being allowed
to get married, there wasn't any hope for that marriage in the first
place. And without destroying any particular marriage, how is the
institution of marriage to be destroyed? I've never seen a logical
causal argument made here to support this kind of rhetoric; I suspect I
never will.
Ed Brayton << File: ATT334173.txt >>
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
messages to others.
