To the editor:
In light of Governor Dayton signing the bill legalizing gay marriage, it's clear that equality has been won.
Or has it?
For the liberal who wishes to be as "tolerant" as he touts, the fight for marriage equality is far from over. As you read this, there are thousands of adult, consensual polyamorous relationships (those consisting of more than two people) fighting for their inherent human rights to be legally recognized and to receive the same benefits married couples do. And there are more than that: adult, consensual sibling relationships (brother and brother, sister and brother, etc.) have, for centuries, been viewed as subhuman, and told that their love is not equal to that of an unrelated couple. Will the liberal readily declare that "love has won," when all this other discrimination remains? Are these relationships not worthy of the same recognition and status as heterosexual and homosexual ones?
Despite recent success, the liberal must not become bigoted and throw the rights of these relationships under the bus. To be consistent, the liberal must be willing to take the next step in extending the marriage label to ALL relationships that consist of consenting adults - not just homosexual ones. Indeed, the logical follow-up of same-sex marriage is just this. With the criteria defining marriage being limited to nothing more than mutual love and adult consent, the liberal has pigeonholed himself into a battle far from over, and one that threatens to strip marriage of any distinction whatsoever. So, to stay true to his "tolerant," "open-minded" ideology, and to convince me that marriage really serves no other goal than to personally fulfill, my liberal friends have a lot of work to do.
Until then, I'll side with a definition of marriage that has been consistently shown to work best - a complementary male-female union with the unique ability to bring about the next generation.
And so, to my liberal friends: If you wish to be consistent, you better get going. After all, "love is love," right?