Definitions only work if they are commonly accepted. It is commonly accepted that marriage means a faithful union of a man and a woman.
53% of Americans support the right of gays and lesbians to marry, including 70% of those under 35. So says the lawyer in the case on the Charlie Rose show.
If homosexuals can accept this obvious truth, then they will be quickly emancipated. But their failure to do so, instead trying to muscle in on real marriage, will mean them being pitted against the vast majority of ordinary married couples who feel aggrieved at their own faithful relationship being demeaned.
So people who do things different than they do,
demean them?
Society will break down badly and quickly if ordinary marriage is undermined. Society does not depend on homosexual relationships but it does depend greatly on ordinary marriages. These are facts, not opinions. Don't oppose facts otherwise it will be clear that you are the bigot.
Why does society depend on ordinary marriages? At a time when population control is a great need in society? The fact is, society does
not depend on ordinary marriage, as opposed to gay marriage. It is just different than what you consider normal and usual, so you are bothered by it. You find it "disgusting" for that reason, or else it contradicts what your preachers tell you.
It is interesting that I heard a spokesman for Prop.8 on the Newshour said that gay marriage "goes against biology." Funny how fundie culture warriors are all for "biology" when it suits their prejudice, but not for a major
part of biology (evolution) when it does
not-- as many of you say on the other recent topic of the day here about theistic evolution.
