Firstly I'd like to say that I am truly grateful to Sed Contra that he gets out there every day and shares his thoughts on these oh so important issues. His perspective is truly impressive. Now into the high points. I was going to say good bits but they're all good, and it sounds pretty British, so I'll skip.

"According to this well researched piece by Stanley Kurtz, the push to same sex marriage in the Nordic countries has resulted in a hastening of the social disillusion of marriage and the resulting impact on rearing kids.

MARRIAGE IS SLOWLY DYING IN SCANDINAVIA. A majority of children in Sweden and Norway are born out of wedlock. Sixty percent of first-born children in Denmark have unmarried parents. Not coincidentally, these countries have had something close to full gay marriage for a decade or more. Same-sex marriage has locked in and reinforced an existing Scandinavian trend toward the separation of marriage and parenthood. The Nordic family pattern--including gay marriage--is spreading across Europe. And by looking closely at it we can answer the key empirical question underlying the gay marriage debate. Will same-sex marriage undermine the institution of marriage? It already has."

"In fact, building on some of what Kurtz wrote and what Mike and I talked about last Saturday, while framing up an extra room on his house, I think America has had de facto (if no de-jure) same sex marriage for decades now. After all, if a man and woman decide to deliberately attempt to thwart their body's potential fertility, rather than simply act within it to schedule or space their possible children, how is their sexual act much different from homosex? Yes, they are using their bodies in a way resonate with their design in the actual act, but they are also using chemicals and devices to make sure their act remains as sterile as any homosexual act would be."

So, yeah. We live in a society, as I seem to recall. Now, it is libertarians who deny this and the left, as far as I can tell, that would affirm this. Thus we have initiatives for safer neighborhoods and safer schools and whatnot on the basis that these things make people's lives better, something Joe L-t would probably deny. So, if we attempt to redefine one of the most important parts of our society, how can it help but change everything? If we're living in a community, and someone's doing something in the community, it affects me. Directly. It doesn't matter if they're painting their house orange or beating their kids, the fact that they do it in private doesn't change the fact that it affects the health of the society that I share with them. Or, as Hilaire Belloc put it, the "flavor" of a society is distinctly different when these things are going on. So it is with sex. If people are contracepting and engaging in homosex, it directly affects me. It directly affects everything that I do and the way that I live, because indeed we are one society, one brotherhood, if you will. If I am everyone's brother, then surely brothers care about what their brothers are doing.

"On a side note, isn't it interesting that Judge Roy Moore could flout the the interpretation of the law from a federal Judge and keep the ten commandments in the Courthouse and the media was filled with commentary about how perniciously he had behaved and yet the mayor of a major U.S. city could decide to do the same with law on the books, not even a judicial opinion, and there is nary a peep of scorn from the Englightened Scribes of the Fourth Estate? The way this story has been covered is perhaps the best instance of media bias that I have seen in years."

Interesting. San Fransisco violates state law by issuing marriage lisences to gay couples and it's ok. Judge Moore does it and he gets crucified. Very interesting. Perhaps a little Roe effect is in action here. You know. People protesting in front of abortion mill X, that's organized crime and we're suing under RICO. People killing their children, not so bad.