“created based on a reasonable Societal need?”
I’m sorry but when my parents got married, I don’t think they did so cause society was going through a crisis. I think it was because they loved each other.

And that’s what marriage is about: Joining the hands and of two people who love each heart and soul. Marriage is an instituion for love; yes children are a output in most cases but you know what? I bet you have a single mom living near you who never married but had a kid.

If marriage is a instituion for children then apparently all the people who had kids due to pre-marital sex are married. Yeah I think I see a ring on every pregnant teen in my school.

And for your information, same-sex marriage doesn’t eliminate pro-family ideals. Why do you think same-sex couples wish to adopt? To give a child a family. I think that’s pro-family there.

1. No

2. My comparison was valid because Marriage is deaf blind and dumb to single people as it is to people who experience same sex attraction and relatives of close blood ties. I’m currently opted out of the Institution because I do not meet the minimum requirement. Neither do people who experience attraction to the same sex.

My comparison does not leave the door open for any form of Discrimination. If people think it will strengthen/weaken Marriage to make it more exclusive for reasons of fertility then they should vote. The fact of the matter is that the position of gay Marriage proponents does open the flood gates to any type of interpretation turning Marriage into a complete sham. Why 2 consenting adults? Why not 3 or 4? Once you argue that Marriage isn’t about “Men or Women” “Children” “Love” “Exclusivity” “commitment” as has been argued by proponents of Gay marriage then you’ve turned the Institution of Marriage into something else entirely. A sham.

Marriage wasn’t instituted because the government cares about which consenting adult you give your Valentines day card to. It was created based on a reasonable Societal need. An observable fact. When Men and Women come together, they bring about the next generation. The Love of a Man and woman has the power to bring about new life. Family.

You have the “Right” to believe in whatever you want no matter how delusional it is and as long as it doesnt harm anyone else. However, It is not a “Right” for you to redefine for everyone and strip away the meaning of our most foundational pro-child, pro-family Public institution based on your delusion.

You don’t like it? Vote.

1. Were you a supporter of the “Stop Sterile Marriage” movement?

2. Your comparison with single people proves too much, since it could justify any form of discrimination in marital law. It is also a good argument for privatization of marriage, which runs counter to what you’re ostensibly arguing.

And as far as some of the comments on here go…It’s completely false to say that only recognizing Marriage between a man and woman is based on hate, religion, and homophobia and nothing else..

The More the so called Equality camp tries to sell “gay marriage” as such, the more supporters will slip through their fingers. People are reasonable and you aren’t going to win your way into anyones heart by insulting their intelligence or their beliefs.

Marriage despite it’s religious ties has it’s roots deep in observable facts. When men and Women come together and bond, their bond, unlike any other in the entire world brings about new life. Their love brings about new life. Hence Marriage came about to strengthen that bond and to protect those children. It’s a celebration of Man and Woman of the possibility of new life. Marriage is an insitution for children. Man and Woman have the right of marriage.

People who experience attraction to the same sex are no more opressed than me, a single male for not participating in the institution of Marriage. I’m single, i have no marital benefits, i’m not opressed. I understand my place in Society and I like that there exists an institution to encourage the bond of men and women who bring about the next generation and nurture their offspring in that setting.

To butcher that foundation for the wants of a very small minority is to turn the institution of marriage into a Sham for everyone.

To clarify, my relationship, religion, and final destination are all mine. Who I marry, in your faith, may damn me, among other things. But it doesn’t destroy you, correct?

Under that premise, you, and all the others who argue religious conviction need to keep perspective that, as the others have said, this does NOT affect you. It affects no one else. And you do not have the right to impose your religious views on me, especially when I consider how much more devout I am in my faith than most other Christians I’ve met, particularly bigotted ones. There is no threat and justification.