Social scientists have been surprisingly consistent in warning against this fractured family. Which social scientists? What consistency? Could you at least cite some names?

If it continues, almost every child will have several “moms” and “dads,” perhaps six or eight “grandparents,” and dozens of half-siblings. Oh no! 50% of kids under the age of thirteen are already living with a biological and foster parent! We’re giving in to sin! Quick, start praying. It will be a world where little boys and girls are shuffled from pillar to post in an ever-changing pattern of living arrangements-where huge numbers of them will be raised in foster-care homes or living on the street (as millions do in other countries all over the world today). Wait, what about their eight grandparents? Couldn’t they take care of them? This is confusing. Imagine an environment where nothing is stable and where people think primarily about themselves and their own self-preservation. Wow, that’s kind of hard to imagine. Oh, wait, we’re living in it. Sorry to disappoint you, but this isn’t Teletubby Land.

The apostle Paul described a similar society in Romans 1, which addressed the epidemic of homosexuality that was rampant in the ancient world and especially in Rome at that time. Luckily, in the meantime, we’ve found a vaccine to homosexuality, hence ending the rampant epidemic. Los Angeles and San Francisco are still qualified as “highly contagious areas,” however, so be careful. Some holy water and a Bible should be enough to ward off the gays. He wrote, “They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless” (v. 29-31, NIV). In the modern version, the above reads: they sinfully indulge in singers like Kylie Minogue, Madonna, and Cher. Also, they go to the gym every day, eat nothing but protein shakes, and have impeccable taste in the most satanic of activities: design and home decor. They are responsible for the horrors of the fashion industry (not to mention every hair salon in the world.) All of these things are slowly but steadily making the world plunge into the abyss of sin.

It appears likely now that the demise of families will accelerate this type of decline dramatically, resulting in a chaotic culture that will be devastating to children. Indeed, Belgium, Spain, Canada, the Netherlands, and South Africa are all living in chaos. The Dutch could have stuck to tulips and Gouda cheese, but no, they had to go and screw everything up for themselves.

Argument #2
The introduction of legalized gay marriages will lead inexorably to polygamy and other alternatives to one-man, one-woman unions. Maybe people could have *gasp* relationships outside of marriage? Or maybe even *shudder* sex before marriage? But obviously that isn’t happening, since we have no teen pregnancy.

In Utah, polygamist Tom Green, who claims five wives, is citing Lawrence v. Texas as the legal authority for his appeal. This past January, a Salt Lake City civil rights attorney filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of another couple wanting to engage in legal polygamy. Their justification? Lawrence v. Texas.

The ACLU of Utah has actually suggested that the state will “have to step up to prove that a polygamous relationship is detrimental to society” -as opposed to the polygamists having to prove that plural marriage is not harmful to the culture. (Well, that is they way the legal system works.) Do you see how the game is played? Despite 5,000 years of history, (I don’t know whose 5000 years of history you’re talking about, but 5000 years ago the Ancient Egyptian pharaohs were marrying their sisters. Maybe they had it right, I don’t know.) the burden now rests on you and me to prove that polygamy is unhealthy. The ACLU went on to say that the nuclear family “may not be necessarily the best model.” Indeed, Justice Antonin Scalia warned of this likelihood in his statement for the minority in the Lawrence case. It took less than six months for his prediction to become reality. (cue tragic music)

Why will gay marriage set the table for polygamy? Because there is no place to stop once that Rubicon has been crossed. Historically, the definition of marriage has rested on a bedrock of tradition, legal precedent, theology and the overwhelming support of the people. So did slavery. Therefore, it shouldn’t have been abolished.

After the introduction of marriage between homosexuals, however, it will be supported by nothing more substantial than the opinion of a single judge or by a black-robed panel of justices. Oh, I get it. The gay community is unsubstantial. After all, there’s only a few million of them. After they have done their wretched work, the family will consist of little more than someone’s interpretation of “rights.” I don’t know about you, but two people who love each other are enough of a family to suit me. Given that unstable legal climate, it is certain that some self-possessed judge, somewhere, will soon rule that three men and one woman can marry. Or five and two, or four and four. Who will be able to deny them that right? The guarantee is implied, we will be told, by the Constitution. Those who disagree will continue to be seen as hate-mongers and bigots. (Indeed, those charges are already being leveled against those of us who espouse biblical values!) How about group marriage, or marriage between relatives, or marriage between adults and children? How about marriage between a man and his donkey? Anything allegedly linked to “civil rights” will be doable. The legal underpinnings for marriage will have been destroyed. This is perhaps going a teensy bit too far. Ever met anyone who wanted to marry his donkey? And exactly who does that person expect to get the donkey to sign a marriage license? Many societies support polygamy. Now, our society traditionally sees marriage as being between two people, but who knows what society will be like in the future? Talking about gay marriage would have been inconceivable twenty years ago.

Argument #3
An even greater objective of the homosexual movement is to end the state’s compelling interest in marital relationships altogether. This “homosexual movement” sound scary. Who knows where they’ll strike next? After marriages have been redefined, divorces will be obtained instantly, will not involve a court, and will take on the status of a driver’s license or a hunting permit. With the family out of the way, all rights and privileges of marriage will accrue to gay and lesbian partners without the legal entanglements and commitments heretofore associated with it. You know, somehow this doesn’t sound bad at all.

I think the guy who wrote this is just a big closet case.

How can you believe in God if there is evil in the world?  If God is all-powerful, and he loves us all, why does evil even exist?  Why does He let us suffer?

Now, fundamentalists will probably answer with something taken out of the Bible:  because of the Devil, because of original sin, because of the sinful nature of the human being.  However, we must remember that the Bible was written by humans, not by God, even if it was inspired by God.  Therefore, the Bible serves only as an explanation for a situation that already existed before it was written.  It is, in a way, what mankind has come up with as an answer to its existential questions.  If we are to assume that it is God’s word, then we must ask ourselves why God must give explanations for his work.  Indeed, the Bible constantly provides overly simplistic stories and over-generalizes to explain things.  Those who interpret the Bible literally acting  childishly: even with an outside view of things, it is obvious that the Bible, while certainly being a historically accurate document, refers to a culture and historical context so different than our own that its messages must be interpreted with careful consideration of these differences.  So, the Bible actually simplifies things, but these stories require a careful and very specialized analysis to be accurately interpreted, making the Bible an essentially contradictory document.

If God existed, there would be one God, one Church for everyone.  Why?  Because God would have revealed himself in a way that could leave no possible doubt.  Even if you answer that I shouldn’t be doubting God’s existence, the very fact that I am implies that His revelation is incomplete.  This in turn implies that the Christian conception of God is faulty.  Furthermore, how society sees God and the roles it attributes to God in society would not have changed throughout the ages.  Until roughly the eighteenth century, religion was used to order society and to justify the social situation.  (This, of course, continues to this day and has existed in virtually all societies.)  God has also been used to justify hatred, wars, killing, and torture.  Think of the Spanish Inquisition.  Now, as long as believing in God meant respecting the law, everyone followed the state religion.  However, beginning with the late seventeenth and eighteenth century philosophers (Locke, Voltaire, Rousseau), and most noticeably with the French Revolution, God was banished from the foundations of society.  How can God come and go, be in and out of fashion?

Such a God cannot exist.  However, the concept of God has other implications outside of religion.

Indeed, I do not reject religion.  God, for many people, is, more than a source of religious dogma, a manifestation of their inner strength.  He becomes simply a personification and a way of focusing their courage, their willpower, and a source of comfort.

There is a fundamental difference between having faith and being religious.  I will feel touched if someone tells me they’ll pray for me, even though I don’t believe their praying will have any concrete effect.  Faith, no matter what it is in, is fundamental.

I believe in Humanity.  Not God.

Therefore God, while I do not believe He exists, can be a source of faith for people.  However, as said above, that sort of faith is better found in other ways than that of an overzealous, bigot and narrow-minded religion.

Dear Steph,

You can’t see everything in black and white. While it is true that the Dalai Lama and the Free Tibet Movement are not as peace-loving as they are usually depicted, and that the pre-1951 Tibet is far from the tranquil Buddhist kingdom that the western world sees it as, this article is far too vehement and overly critical of the Dalai Lama and of what he is trying to accomplish.

Firstly, it is absurd of you to say that “you don’t win a Nobel Peace Prize without having blood on your hands.” Who did Mother Teresa ever kill? It must also be remembered that the Dalai Lama, while having been recognized as the reincarnation of the preceding Dalai Lama at age two, did not have any political power before he was crowned at age fifteen, at which time the Chinese already effectively controlled Tibet. To accuse him personally of all the shortcomings of Tibetan society is preposterous.

Secondly, you present the Dalai Lama as some sort of religious fanatic, akin to Osama bin Laden. The Dalai Lama works towards human rights. He actually does not want total independence for his country, as he has many times repeated, but only more autonomy. And he most certainly does not have a vision of a “theocratic empire” ruled by himself- indeed, he has proposed, in response to questions on whether the institution of the Dalai Lama was outdated, that the Tibetan people vote on its continuation. The Dalai Lama’s message is one of peace, and yet you compare him to a terrorist who preaches hate.

In slandering the Dalai Lama you are undemining his efforts to fight for the rights of his people, and are therefore indirectly supporting the Chinese dictatorship. You say that “at the very least the Tibetan ought to be given a referendum on independence”- I think so too, but you’re perhaps forgetting that China has no respect for human rights whatsoever, let alone the right of indigenous self-determination.