In our earlier post on the Washington Supreme Court's same-sex marriage decision we focused on the political and some of the legal aspects of the decision, but we didn't get much into the substance of it.
So what are people thinking? We'll refer you a thread in today's Spokesman-Review Huckleberries, where you'll see a pretty wide range of opinion.
Blog-runner Dave Oliveria, self-described as a Christian conservative, said that he approved of the ruling. Readers weighed in pro and con, with this bit of commentary from the paper's editor, Steve Smith:
"As always, love the thread. But I can't help but comment on the 'time immemorial' point. From time immemorial, marriage has included multiple-spouse arrangements (and still does in many cultures) has acknowledged gay unions (Egypt, Greece, Rome), has sanctified child abuse (eight-year-old brides for 80-year-old men), has been based on economics, politics and convenience. For most of western history, marriage was a sacrmanet that deprived women of rights, property and pesonal security with efforts to change that relationshiop labeled heresy (presumably because woman's role was so defined for time immemorial). For American evangelicals who tend to be most opposed to gay marriage, time immemorial really means time as measured by their cultural clock. I just think we need to be honest about that."
Oliveria responded, "I was thinking Adam and Eve here, unless the snake was involved in a menage a trois."
Question: Whoever said Adam and Eve were married? The Bible doesn't. And if you say God performed the ceremony, who were the witnesses?