Heh, I wrote that turn of phrase deliberately ;) I'm glad you noticed. My point was to not commit the same mistake of assuming a priori that which we are trying to prove. That is, I have to graciously accept the possibility that there is a good reason for that which does not obviously appear to be true (for homosexuality being wrong), even if I don't understand what that reason might be. For instance, as I was discussing below with Jules, maybe it has something to do with the health of society in aggregate. Under terms like that there might be a sound reason to reject homosexual unions. But I'm afraid my pastor isn't doing such a good job of holding up his banner. F.O.D. |