A Response to The History of Marriage: Poly & Gay
I have accurately pointed out that the distinction “civil union” is more appropriate for the gay community and it provides parity without re-writing the definition of marriage. And the definition of marriage doesn’t change at all just because you can point out that history reveals abundant examples of polygamy and homosexuality.
By-the-way, I would like to know where I even inferred that the GLBT community was inferior in any way to mainstream society. What I did say was that Gays seem to get priorities out of order. What do they gain by having the traditional label of “marriage” and what do they lose by having their unions labeled under the emerging societal adjustments? Any middle-schooler would understand that the answer is: they lose nothing in either case.
No comments:
Post a Comment