One of them did raise the point that one can get "married" to anyone one wants if one can find the right church - it just won't be recognized by the state. So I suppose it wasn't technically correct for me to say that the law prevents the performance of a religious ceremony, but I still say that there's a whopping big difference between being married and being "married." One guy suggested the very Libertarian notion that either the government should recognize all marriages between consenting adults, or just not recognize any marriages at all and have it be purely religious rather than legal. It's an extreme statement, but it's sort of where my argument does lead.
One guy told me that the last sentence in my letter could be used to argue in favor of pedophiles and polygamists. Polygamists, yeah - while I'm not personally comfortable with the idea, and it's not something I'd want for me and mine, if all the parties involved are consenting adults I suppose it is (or should be) their right. The suggestion that I'm in support of pedophiles marrying children, though, is way out of line, especially since I was careful to include the phrase "consenting adults" in my original argument.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2008-11-10 09:16 am (UTC)One guy told me that the last sentence in my letter could be used to argue in favor of pedophiles and polygamists. Polygamists, yeah - while I'm not personally comfortable with the idea, and it's not something I'd want for me and mine, if all the parties involved are consenting adults I suppose it is (or should be) their right. The suggestion that I'm in support of pedophiles marrying children, though, is way out of line, especially since I was careful to include the phrase "consenting adults" in my original argument.