In response to:

Redefining Marriage Sign of a Lost Society

Corbett_ Wrote: Nov 26, 2012 11:50 AM
No society should change the definition of a bedrock institution such as marriage without a damned good reason. pandering to a minority of a tiny minority is not a good enough reason. The last time the left tampered with the institution of marriage in the name of "fairness" and "compassion", we got "no-fault" divorce. Since that date the number of divorces has risen astronomically and the number of people getting married has shrunk. Marriage is not a good deal for men these days since a woman can repudiate the marriage contract at any time for any reason and soak the man with alimony and child support for years. This is what the left has wrought with the last definitional change. Why should we change the definition again?

One significant development in the recent election was votes in four states approving same sex marriage initiatives. Until now, all previous state referenda to approve same sex marriage – 32 of them - failed.

The Wall Street Journal editorial page – a place where conservatives usually turn for intellectual capital – saw this as cause for celebration.

According to the Journal, marriage definition should come from voters, not from court orders. Americans, they argue, have “shown themselves more than capable of changing their views on gay marriage the democratic way.”

In other words, our definition of marriage should follow process, not...