This morning, Massachusetts claimed the distinction of being the first state in the union to conduct homosexual marriages. Not civil unions, mind you. Marriages.
Those in favor of redefining marriage to include any two adults claim that this is a civil rights issue. They claim that the real issue is ending discrimination. However, I would strenuously disagree with that sentiment. One reason why I disagree with that argument is because proponents of homosexual marriage have no principled reason for ending the redefinition at two consenting adults. They have no principled reason for denying the right of marriage to multiple adults. After all, banning poly-amorous marriages is a no less discriminatory policy. In fact, banning multiple-person marriages may be more discriminatory because it actually touches on the constitutionally guaranteed right of the free exercise of the Mormon religion.
Homosexual marriage is not about ending discrimination. It is about earning acceptance, approval and moral equivalency for the homosexual lifestyle. The push for homosexual marriage comes from a desire by the homosexual community (as well as those who are firmly committed to the doctrine of moral relativism) to have the government declare that their lifestyle choices are morally equivalent to the choices supported by all major religions of the world -- all major religions of the world besides secular humanism, that is. Perhaps Massachusetts' legalization of homosexual marriage is just another sign that secular humanism and its tenets of moral relativism are quickly becoming the official, state established religion of the United States.
