[Vision2020] Re: Constitutional Ban on Gay Marriage

[Douglas]

Visionaries,

Far from this being a demonstration of how illogical I am, it is actually a 
demonstration of whether or not ethical relativists have the courage of 
their convictions. If we reject the Christian morality that marriage 
consists of one man, one woman, one time, and we base this rejection on the 
fact that marriage is now only a "secular legal contract," then on what 
basis, Ralph, do we limit secular legal contract to just two parties? We 
were mistaken, it appears, in limiting marriage to heteros. Why are we not 
also mistaken in limiting it to couples? I urge you, Ralph, to stop trying 
to impede sexual liberation. The last thing we need around here is 
atheistic bluestocking wowserism.

Cordially,

Douglas Wilson




t 02:18 PM 8/2/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>         Doug Wilson doesn't seem to want to recognize the difference 
> between church and state, so he gives us a homily about hypocrisy and sin 
> instead of recognizing that marriage, as far as the state is concerned, 
> is not a sacred institution, but a secular legal contract binding on the 
> two parties concerned. He illogically equates monogamy with polygamy and, 
> even more illogically, pretends that polygamy is a matter of how many 
> people can physically fit into a bedroom.
>         Doug concludes his diatribe by equating marriage laws with 
> building codes. Anyone who hasn't been indoctrinated with Wilsonian 
> "logic" can readily observe how totally illogical he is.
>         Ralph Nielsen
>
>On Friday, August 1, 2003, at 08:31 AM, vision2020-request@moscow.com wrote:
>
>>
>>From: Douglas <dougwils@moscow.com>
>>Date: Fri Aug 1, 2003  8:48:50 AM US/Pacific
>>To: vision2020@moscow.com
>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Constitutional Ban on Gay Marriage
>>
>>
>>Visionaries,
>>
>>There is an important difference between sexual hypocrisy, which our 
>>nation has in spades, and which practices privately what it condemns 
>>publicly, and the tragic way of removing that hypocrisy, which is to 
>>bring yourself to approve the sin formally. Hypocrisy is the tribute that 
>>vice pays to virtue, and we always need to remember there are two ways to 
>>get out of a double standard. One is to repent of the sin, and the other 
>>is to drop the pretence of virtue. We are in the course of pursuing the 
>>latter, and it will not bring enlightenment.
>>
>>If it is true that marriage is nothing more than a "tax break," and is no 
>>longer a sacred institution, then we are not just talking about 
>>homosexual unions. We are also talking about polygamy, as long as more 
>>than two can physically fit into the privacy of the bedroom. What kind of 
>>sexual unions will have to be permitted as soon as the courts learn the 
>>rudiments of logic? He who says A must say B.
>>
>>And while we are on the subject of keeping the government out of the 
>>bedroom, why is it, when I built my house, the government wanted to tell 
>>me how far apart the sheetrock screws had to be in the bedroom, how the 
>>electric outlets had to be placed, how big the windows had to be, and so 
>>on, ad nauseam. Government out of the bedroom, aye.
>>
>>Cordially,
>>
>>Douglas
>
>_____________________________________________________
>List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the 
>communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
>ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ