If “love is love” is a sufficient enough reason to redefine marriage for same-sex couples, then it’s also a sufficient enough reason to redefine marriage for throuples. If “love” is the qualifier, and if we dare not impose our definition of love on others, then how can we prevent anyone from calling anything “marriage” and demanding equal recognition?
Should we allow siblings to marry, provided they love each other? After all, love is love. What about the man from South Korea who married a pillow? Should we recognise this as a true marriage, or do we deny him that “human right” to marry whoever (or whatever) he truly loves? What about the “self-love” movement, which has led to numerous women marrying themselves?
If “love” is the criteria for marriage, where does it end? Where do we draw the line? The ultimate end is obvious: the abolition of marriage. The institution will be redefined beyond all meaning, because something that means everything, actually means nothing…
The point is made perfectly clear by Dr Ryan Anderson in the following video:
