In response to:

The Case Against “Equality” Part 2

glindsay Wrote: Mar 03, 2013 11:19 AM
Question 2 is an absurd red herring, and you know it. Allowing same-sex couples to marry in no way threatens humanity's survival, unless you take the insane next step that you imply, that same-sex marriage will be mandatory, and opposite-sex marriage banned. We need and will benefit as a society when same-sex couple can wed, because marriage stabilizes couples, and stable households are good for society. This positive good has nothing to do with whether a marriage, Gay or straight, leads to children. However, all marriages have the potential for children. Yes, same-sex couples cannot reproduce by marital coitus, but large numbers of hetero couples reproduce by assisted technology, adoption, and children from prior marriages. Get real.

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...