In response to:

The Case Against “Equality” Part 2

dnelson81 Wrote: Mar 04, 2013 6:13 AM
Mr. Turek's reasoning regarding why same-gender marriage should not be allowed is flawed. First, allowing same-gender marriage would not make marriage "genderless". It would make marriage gender-neutral, but not "genderless". The civil contract of marriage has nothing to do with children. Allowing same-gender marriage would in no way affect the ability of people to get married and have children. There is no suggestion of same-gender marriage only. So the whole "society ending" argument is invalid. Catholic Charities choose to stop providing adoptions. They were not forced. Anti-discrimination laws are already in place. Granting of same-gender marriage is unrelated to those laws.
Jerome41 Wrote: Mar 06, 2013 8:03 PM
Your statement implies Turek used some degree of reasoning, I fail to see it.

In yesterday’s column, I listed some of the benefits that natural marriage provides children and society. But some claim that promoting natural marriage exclusively violates the rights of people who are attracted to the same sex. That’s not true. The three P’s will help us see why.

The government has only three options in addressing human behavior. It can prohibit a behavior, it can permit a behavior or it can promote a behavior—the three P’s.

Our laws prohibit sexual relationships such as polygamy, incest and pedophilia. They permit homosexual relationships and non-marital heterosexual relationships. And due to the immense...