I think, ultimately, and going back some way in the thread, that I agree with the sentiments that: 1) it is important to counteract the (in my view, misguided) "religious" basis for supporting Prop 8 (like) legislation in order to successfully pursue the "gay agenda" (you gayhadists, you wink ) plank of same-gender* unions, 2) religion should have no role whatsoever in civil legislation regarding marriage, or any other governmental proscriptions, and c) the primarily Christian-religiously-based arguments are based upon a narrow reading of (primarily) OT proscriptions, rather than the gist of Jesus' (NT) teachings. (I personally draw a bright line between the Gospels and subsequent opinions expressed by followers, because their personal agendas tended to obscure/blur the essence of Jesus' teachings. Seriously, what does Revelations really have to do with Jesus?)

* I prefer the term "same-gender" rather than "same-sex" because it refers to the status of the person rather than emphasizing "sex," which we all know is "icky" to Americans. wink

Last edited by NW Ponderer; 12/11/08 12:47 AM. Reason: add editorial comment
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich