quote:
Originally posted by Wednesday:
First, the issue of Church and state comes into play. Can state or federal law be based on the scriptures of any religion? That's a huge question.

Also, the idea that true Judeo-Christian scriptures disapproves of homosexuality can be challenged, believe me. If you'd care to cite your sources, I'd love to play devil's advocate (get it?).
Separation of church and state and the stance of Judeo-Christian scriptures on homosexuality are topics that would require (and probably already have) their own threads. I'm not interested in debating the legitimacy of homosexuality in this particular discussion - a debate on that wouldn't change anyone's mind anyway. [mwah hwah haa] I'm more concerned with the supposition that the most fundamental definition of marriage should be summarily dismissed, thus building up to a comprehensive rethink of the underpinnings of our society.

This issue may seem small to some people, but its social and practical implications are staggering. Whether you want to look at it as the first step toward an enlightened new world free from the trappings of religion and ethics [yuh huh] or as another milestone in the moral decay of society, this issue is just one little domino in a long chain of dominoes that lead ultimately to a society completely different from the one we know now. Should personal convictions play a role in your position on this issue? Only if you value playing a part in determining the course of your world over simply telling people what they want to hear and won't get indignant over.