In response to:

Why a Good Person Can Vote Against Same-Sex Marriage

Lib at Heart Wrote: Nov 07, 2012 4:10 PM
Dennis writes: "But black sporting events and white sporting events, black restrooms and white restrooms, black schools and white schools, or black clothing stores and white clothing stores would be considered immoral. " But 75 to 100 years ago, such things would not have been viewed as immoral by a large percentage. It's called progress. Like many, Prager seems to support the progress that got us where we are today, but doesn't want to see it continue into the future. (Progress in past good; progress in present or future bad....)

Next week voters in Maine, Maryland and Washington will vote on whether to redefine marriage to include same-sex couples.

Given that there are good people on both sides of this issue, how are we to explain their opposing views?

The primary explanation is this: Proponents and opponents ask two different questions.

Proponents of same-sex marriage ask: Is keeping the definition of marriage as man-woman fair to gays? Opponents of same-sex marriage ask: Is same-sex marriage good for society?

Few on either side honestly address the question of the other side. Opponents of same-sex marriage rarely acknowledge...