Member Rara Avis
You're trying to prove your point by appealing to me personally, but I'm concerned with a more objective good.
There is no objective good, Brian. There is only opinion.
To legislate your opinion over someone else's is simply to destroy the diversity that is humanity. Save where others are faced with harm, people need the freedom to define their own paths, their own fates, their own accomplishments. Most will occasionally get it wrong, of course, but mistakes are the price we pay for growth. The greater good won't come from protecting people from their mistakes, but rather by helping them learn from them. First, of course, we have to learn from our own mistakes … a hurdle few will ever pass.
I know, I know, I'm only repeating myself.
I guess that makes it my turn again?
1) Most people grassroots really are against homosexual marriage
And forty years ago, most people were against equality for blacks as well. Fortunately, human rights aren't granted by majority vote, nor even by the government. Our role, at best, is to acknowledge such rights as the will of God. Or fail to acknowledge, as is so often the case throughout history.
2) Preservation of traditional marriage is a defensive not an offensive move …
Really? Personally, I find current prejudices very offensive.
Those who wish only to defend traditional marriage need do nothing, because traditional marriage is in no danger. It will continue to exist, just as it should. After all, the marriage, intermittent affairs, divorce, remarriage, more affairs, another divorce, a third marriage, ad nauseum, hurts no one except those directly involved. It would be a bit hypocritical of me to suggest traditional marriage in the 21st Century should be better regulated. No harm, no foul works both ways.
3) … And when the variation has become widespread, much trouble has accompanied.
Unsupported fear is a poor reason to deprive others of basic human rights. It's a common reason, I'll grant you, but a poor one nonetheless.