Skip to main content

View Diary: Chelsea Clinton takes on Rick Warren over marriage equality (190 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  So let me define this in words Warren can (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ebohlman, mapamp

    understand (or not; he won't understand that he is dead set on not understanding but, you know, whatever):

    Nobody is "redefining" marriage. Marriage is an institution. What is at issue is not how it is defined but rather who is allowed into that institution. It is pretty clear that, as an institution, marriage is entered into by two people. Despite what Warren may claim, it is strongly implied that for a very long time that was NOT the biblical understanding of marriage. Or does the name of King Solomon mean nothing to him? (Another of those important figures whose name he "can't recall at the moment" perhaps?).

    So, marriage in the US--before and henceforth--is an institution entered into by two people at a time. No "redefinition" is necessary.

    •  It's important to remember (0+ / 0-)

      that in all four marriage referenda last month, there were legal battles over the exact wording of the ballot measures. In all four cases, the relevant authorities ruled that the language couldn't include any form of "redefine". This was far more significant than it might look at first glance, since "redefine" turns out to be our opponents' most effective talking point. When they get to frame the issue as "redefining" marriage, they usually win. When they don't, they usually lose.

      Writing in all lower-case letters should be a capital offense

      by ebohlman on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 04:05:14 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site