The Christianist Stylings of Al Mohler

Albert Mohler doesn't like the New York Times editorial titled Bigotry on the Ballot taking North Carolina to task for Amendment One. Mohler's biggest problem with the Times piece seems to be the first part of the concluding paragraph (which he cites):

Opponents of marriage equality have never been able to show any evidence that any harm is caused to heterosexual marriages by granting all American adults the right to marry as they choose — because there is no such evidence.

Mohler's answer:

Legalizing same-sex marriage redefines marriage as an institution, leading to a fundamental redefinition of society. Opponents of same-sex marriage believe that such a redefinition, in itself, is a harm to the entire society. 

That's not evidence Al. That's just religious rhetoric wrapped in talking points. Then Mohler changes the subject.

Behold the slippery slope:

All American adults should have the right to marry as they choose? All? This means the legalization of polygamy and incest. Proponents of same-sex marriage respond to such assertions with anger and vitriol, but they cannot deny that polygamy is a very real issue and that at least some American adults have demanded a right to marry their closest relations.

I am only surprised that he left out bestiality for the "marry their dog" argument. There are some people who think that polygamy should be legalized. However, neither the New York Times nor Amendment One have anything to do with polygamy since that is already illegal as are incest, bestiality and the marriage to household plants and appliances.

I find it astonishing that Mohler describes the Times piece as "undisguised intellectual dishonesty." Really Al? Really?