Originally Posted by Lawdog88
There will never be complete consistency or perfect symmetry in the argument - actually on either side - because one view accepts as a fundamental premise that homosexual (insert any other of your choice) behavior is perverted on the basis of a moral distinction, and the other does not.
I totally understand that you would want to stay away from the moral POV, and make your arguments along political lines.
Politics and amorality can indeed make fine bedfellows, in a politically correct atmosphere.
OK, but I'm fine with making a moral argument for gay marriages. I don't care enough about polygamy - or the myriad other possibilities - to even make the effort, but it seems moot in any case. It won't happen in my life time and I don't sense the same level of injustice and/or lives made difficult for no reason that I do with gay marriages. I could be open to the argument for it, but it remains a separate issue for me.