Homosexual marriage

[Lief Erikson]

You say "moral" as though it were a bad word. The current definition of marriage is between a man and a woman. In most places. Acceptance of homosexuality means a redefinition to this. The state is saying that couplings aside from a man and a woman have the right to make this statement. And if two men can do the job of raising a child as well as a man and a woman, then three men can too, or four men, or five. Indeed, surely they can do the job even better (since marriage with a partnership is seen as normally preferable to situations with a single parent). So as far as the child is concerned, this kind of marriage would sound great. As far as interpersonal relationships is concerned- why not three? Really, why not?

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

Marriage could simply be defined as between TWO loving adults.

Well, between two adults anyway. You can't stipulate loving.

It already has been defined as between a man and a woman. Why do you think it would it stop with two adults, really?

Originally Posted by Count Comfect

There's a problem with this reasoning: animals are not citizens.

There's no law that says an American isn't allowed to marry someone who's French.