In a brilliant move, the Obama Administration is making war on the electorate for failing to grasp that he is the Wave of the Future.
Yes. That darn NY Times poll finding 67% of Americans think the gay “marriage” statement was pure politics is the result of a news organ that is biased against Obama.
Speaking of waves of the future, vanguards of history and people who don’t seem to grasp how they sound to normal people, here is a staunch advocate of gay “marriage” from my comboxes responding to the fact that all the current arguments for gay “marriage” work equally well as arguments for incestuous “marriage”:
I never said I categorically object to incestuous marriage. I’m saying it’s virtually a non-issue and appears to have a number of legitimate secular considerations weighing against it. You’re basically asking me to issue a ruling on a hypothetical, how to regulate the supply of something for which there is virtually no demand and unlikely to be any in the foreseeable future. To the extent most incestuous relationships are criminal child abuse, I just don’t see where marriage even comes onto the radar screen. I will, however, take the bait and give you the answer you seem to be fishing for. IF there were truly instances of adult siblings who came into a romantic relationship of truly consensual accord and IF their coupling would not pose a greater public health risk (genetic or psychological health risk to offspring), than we can tolerate as a society, then no, I would not see any legitimate basis upon which to deny them the protections of civil union/marriage.
I hate being right all the time. Not that I don’t think our civilization will attempt to head this direction. I think it will. Titanic could also not be stopped from moving full speed ahead to New York. Nonetheless, it did not arrive. Hubris has that effect on things.