Considering your argument in your second to last paragraph, would it not make any difference whether you treat both groups equally the same or equally but different?
The proponents of SSM want to be treated the equally the same. They see little difference between the traditional definition and the one they put forward, except that the traditional definition is denying them their rights (that ever present call in a liberal society, for rights). The cultural baggage attached to marriage, it seems, makes it impossible for those against SSM to accept it, but it also makes it impossible for those for SSM to get anything less than treatment that is equally the same as their counterparts.
I'm arguing that the two groups are different and we need to respect that. I haven't argued fom history ("baggage") but from the facts as best as I see them. The fact that history backs me - I see that as vindication. As it stands gays are free to live out their relations and I see no reason to challenge that. The danger is granting their wish is the corrosion it would bring to the concepts of marriage, monogamy and gender, and that would hinder us in raising future generations.
Hey just added you to my favorites. This really is a nice site to read. I actually agree with the last comment. Thanks and keep up the great work! golf equipment los angeles
Commenting by HaloScan
