The Crease has taken exception to some of my comments on the gay marriage debate, stating that I make some
interesting points, but to me he seems to be viewing the issue through a rather narrow scope. He's casting the issue on individual terms, when really it's a broad societal issue.
John goes on to say that the issue is really much greater than I am casting it as, and that it influences the basic foundations of our society.
Generally, I tend to agree with them, but more importantly I think he has misunderstood what I meant by stating
As a libertarian, I generally believe we are each free to do what we want as long as our actions don't directly hurt others. To that end, I have no problem with homosexual's doing what they do or referring to themselves as married.
All I was implying was that in the privacy of ones bedroom and thoughts, we can each call ourselves and see ourselves in whatever light we want. What I was not doing was making a statement on the impact of legalized and state recognized gay marriage on anyone else.
I have my own personal feelings on the subject, but I haven't fully developed them to the point of willingly sharing with them. When I do, I will post them. However, I always support the right of anyone to try and challenge society and to change norms and the law but do not necessarily agree with the intent of all campaigns seeking change.
Its the old "I defend your right to say what you want, even if I don't agree with it" standard. I'd chalk it up to the golden rule - Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You.