David Mills writes an interesting article which posits that the definition of marriage is both more important and more attainable than the definition of 'conservative'- and rebuts Steort's article on marriage :
... Imagine the original editors of National Review, Buckley, Kirk, Chambers, and the rest, and others of their sort, gathered in a room in the fifties, and then imagine the scalding rebuke they would have given to someone who proposed homosexual “marriage” as a conservative position, especially if he argued for it on the basis of “maximal experiential union.”...
.
No comments:
Post a Comment