Quote Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr View Post
I'm not American, but from the articles I've read and the stuff I've seen on the internet, the arguments against gay marriage are rarely expressed in outright religious terms, whatever the underlying motivations might be.

I think a big reason behind why people are shooting past each other on this issue is because for some bizzare reason, whenever it is brought up, everybody seems to be come over with some sort of Ayn Rand idealism. Yeah, OK, its unfair and discrimination that two gay guys don't get tax breaks and legal recognition like a straight couple do. The thing is its not just unfair to gay people, its unfair to everybody that isn't part of a heterosexual couple. It's unfair to people who choose to be single (oh but they were born that way!), it's unfair to people who don't practice monogamy etc.

The problem with that take on things is that while idealism is nice, it's not realistic. To oppose traditional marriage on that basis will fail in that same way that it fails to challenge concepts like progressive taxation. Heterosexual couples get the privileges they do because of their historic and continuing social role.

If you want that privilege extended to gay couples, then make a case for it. You can challenge to modern relevance of theheterosexual couple. You can argue the social benefits of allowing gay marriage and the role they could have in adopting foster kids, for example.

But don't reduce this issue to being about petty economic gains.
I do not need to argue the social benefits because they are the same social benefits that exist for hetero couples, the same social benefits so espoused by pro family rhetoric.

Two parent households, in general, raise more stable kids. People who get married tend to drop anchor, grow roots and become stable, predictable taxpayers. Communities with more homeowners and 2 parents households tend to create more prosperous communities, better social services, less crime, better schools. No couple in the history of couples ever said "hey lets move to the neighborhood with lots of crappy apartments and absentee parents." All of this is a no brainer. Families = stability. Let them make families.

To argue that marriage is something sanctimonious is to ignore the state of marriage today. People get married less and later. And here you have this one demographic that is begging to be married, begging to share benefits (like the whole reason the DOMA case from New York is before SCOTUS), begging to adopt children that are living in state custody or bouncing between foster homes, and we are denying them that right with the left hand while reaching out our right hand and telling people to espouse family values.

Everything in this post was also contained in the first post. I was happy to explain it to you, though.