Some surprising comments.
>So, you'd force people wanting marriage into the arms
>of religion?
Marriage IS a religious institution.
There is no forcing. Pro-marriage folks are elbowing themselves through the crowd and into those arms without any forcing.
Then comes your catechism of questions that are really some kind of accusations.
>You think detailed behavioral contracts would help, not
>hurt? You think the divorce revolution is a bad thing?
>You talk about marriages and families as if they're
>self-contained and not part of a wider society and its
>immense problems? You say nothing at all about
>European-style family support programs?
Jeebus... Did this Woj guy really say all that?
I have to read the list more strictly. If he is against all those thing, WHAT A BASTARD! Do you have any "I hate Woj!" bumper stickers?
>You think gays demanding equal marital rights is a form of
>cultural pollution?
This is the worst part.
It may well be that I misread Woj's post (I didn't read all his other comments), but it would seem he is arguing that opposite of what you say.
Viz., marriage is a contract and people can do what they want, leave the word marriage to the religious freaks.
In that sense, fine by me.
Who needs to be a "husband" of a "wife"? Regardless the sexes, the roles are antiquated.
Ken.
-- Love is the exchange of two fantasies and the contact of two skins.
-- Nicholas Chamfort