Defining 'marriage' III
The editorial on same-sex marriage maintains that there is a parallel between the current marriage issue and the issue of slavery. There is no such parallel!
Today there are strong forces that have redefined marriage from the traditional meaning of being a union between a man and a woman. And they want that redefinition to be included in our laws.
When slavery was outlawed in our nation, it was not a matter of redefining it. For both sides on that issue, slavery had the same meaning, namely that some persons were the property of others, who could demand any labor from them without compensation.
Marriage cannot and should not be redefined. Other structures of cohabitations should be defined in other ways.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Incomprehensible? That’s Obama
- Punishment pushback II
- Punishment pushback I
- Not taxpayers’ responsibility
- Help for Tina
- Beware this Wolf II
- Don’t blame bus drivers I
- Beware this Wolf I
- F-35 analysis lousy
- Don’t blame bus drivers II