Polyamorous 'marriage'?
Those who argue that changing the legal definition of marriage will eventually open the floodgates have frequently been scoffed at. Now it seems that "eventually" has come sooner than expected, as Robert George reports here.
07 August 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2006
(281)
-
▼
August
(23)
- The Koyzis bowtie collectionCount them — there are...
- Fauré's PavaneMany years ago I purchased a vinyl r...
- A Prairie Home CompanionOne evening back in 1978, ...
- To stir the patriotic heart. . .Three years ago, w...
- Hola de Señorita YolisaI have just received word f...
- Pluto demotedIt's official: Astronomers strip Plut...
- Christians on the front linesThanks to Michael Van...
- Visiting the WRFMonday afternoon I was privileged ...
- The 'anklebiter', Ellul and neocalvinismBrian Jana...
- A musical favouriteI love virtually everything com...
- For all the saints. . .Centuries from now, when th...
- Night comes to the city© 2006, Theresa D. C. Koyzis
- Why is it. . .. . . that, when North American Angl...
- Ellul's influenceThis week's Comment piece is writ...
- The future of air travel?In the wake of the recent...
- Eye-poppin' dance sceneGideon Strauss claims an af...
- New address for websiteThere is now a new, greatly...
- Whither the rule of law in Ontario?As the Caledoni...
- Janine Jansen in concertI would love to have been ...
- A call to the priesthood?Given that I am writing a...
- Polyamorous 'marriage'?Those who argue that changi...
- Another of those (*sigh*) internet quizzesI genera...
- A familiar suburb and memory laneJordan J. Ballor ...
-
▼
August
(23)
No comments:
Post a Comment