rj, you refuse to answer because you know that your answer is logically inconsistent with your position on in this thread. No one is suggesting that brothers should be allowed to marry, but he is absolutely right that it is a logical continuance of your argument for gay marriage, which is that consenting adults who choose to marry should be permitted to do so without the religious beliefs of others interfering. You're the one that said that the only requirement should be love. He's simply illustrating that it is about more than love, and that the difference between you and someone who opposes gay marriage is not whether a line exists, but rather where it is drawn. You continue to insist in your posts that there should be no line, and that anyone who suggests otherwise is somehow equating homosexuality with incest, etc. However, since you believe that brothers should not be permitted to marry, you do believe that there is a line, contrary to your posts here.