OK, best arguments:
1. As an institution marraige is not an expression of love no matter how doe-eyed the lovers stare at each other. It is about obligations that remain long after the hormonal rush has worn off. If people want expressions of their love they should get matching novelty t-shirts. A marriage is society's way of stating it has recognized a state of affairs that exists uniquely between two people. The remainder of society is forbidden to interfere with them and they are compelled under threat of legal sanction to remain loyal to each other. If either of them breaks the terms of that agreement society will take legal action in favor of the remaining partner.
Granted, no-fault divorce and common law marriage weaken this but that is not an argument for further weakening
And your argument for restricting this to heterosexual relationships is?
In the end society--all societies, universally throughout time--have marriage. It isn't about endorsing love but protect society from indiscriminate behavior.
And it's somehow harmful to promote monogamy amongst homosexuals, how?
2. the LBGTWTFBBQ community is not dealing honestly with society. First they deny plain facts: homosexuality can be acculturated as many cultures in history have done so. Obviously Christians etc reject this acculturation and it is their freedom of conscience to do so but the BLT community denies that it even happens to avoid the debate or having to swear against eforts to recruit.
Can you produce evidence, other than irrelevant historical evidence, to prove that this is taking place?
I can produce evidence that Christians have engaged in genocide. That historical evidence isn't proof that modern Christians do so.
Second, the WWRPD (What Would Ru Paul Do) community claims they are born this way (see the above) then claim they somehow exert free will when they wish to prove their love and devotion vis-a-vis marriage.
What does one have to do with another? You were born heterosexual, were you not? Are you then proving that you *choose* to be heterosexual when you make a choice to marry?
I agree- relationships are a choice. I suppose a homosexual person could make the choice to never have sex, never engage in a relationship, live and die alone. But why should they?
Liars should have their social agendas dismissed out of hand.
I agree.
3. Marriage is not a right as the list of people and things you cannot marry is longer than the list of people you can marry. Marry is a privilege granted by society. This penchant by many (including some conservatives and libertarians) to declare every policy preference a "right" is nonsense. If society is asked if it wishes to litigate divorces amongst gays society has the right to say, "No, we do not wish to burden our courts as we do not recognize anything there that could not be settled in civil court." No further justification is needed.
In our Country, this has been decided by the courts as false, during trials to determine the legality of prohibiting marriages between blacks and whites.
Marriage has been deemed a right.
More than a "right to marry" there is the right to self-governance. Laws passed without the consent of the majority of those they would govern is called tyranny. The C3PO community already has every other right bestowed upon all Americans as protected by the Constitution. They are free to petition, campaign etc but let's not have any nonsense about "right to marry".
The right for blacks and whites to marry had to be established without the consent of the majority, as the majority opposed the measure.
