Not if those rules violate the basic equal rights of individuals.<quoted text>
Oh...since you asked...
The question was: Does not society have a right to set certain standards, by which we all live ?
Hallmark crap. Marriage is a legal contract. Marriage is a right.Same-sex marriage proposes the union between two men or two women. This denies the self-evident biological, physiological, and psychological differences between men and women which find their complementarity in marriage.
You don't have to be able to procreate in order to marry.It also denies the specific primary purpose of marriage: the perpetuation of the human race and the raising of children.
Rose's Law:Calling something marriage does not make it marriage. Marriage has always been a covenant between a man and a woman which is by its nature ordered toward the procreation and education of children and the unity and well being of the spouses.
Another is that it always denies a child either a father or a mother. It is in the child’s best interests that he be raised under the influence of his natural father and mother. This rule is confirmed by the evident difficulties faced by the many children who are orphans or are raised by a single parent, a relative, or a foster parent.
The unfortunate situation of these children will be the norm for all children of a same-sex “marriage.” A child of a same-sex “marriage” will always be deprived of either his natural mother or father. He will necessarily be raised by one party who has no blood relationship with him. He will always be deprived of either a mother or a father role model. Same-sex “marriage” ignores a child’s best interests.
Morons with no real argument scream, "But what about the children!?"
Gay couples can raise children without getting married.
What a bunch of BS.Another is that, in the name of the “family,” same-sex “marriage” serves to validate not only such unions but the whole homosexual lifestyle in all its bisexual and transgender variants. Legal recognition of same-sex “marriage” would necessarily obscure certain basic moral values, devalue traditional marriage, and weaken public morality.
Again, stupid, you don't have to be able to procreate in order to marry.The whole purpose of same-sex marriage , objectively speaking, is the personal gratification of two individuals whose union is sterile by nature. It is not entitled, therefore, to the protection the State extends to true marriage.
Rose's Law...By legalizing same-sex “marriage,” the State becomes its official and active promoter. The State calls on public officials to officiate at the new civil ceremony, orders public schools to teach its acceptability to children,
LOL. Slippery slope fallacy.and punishes any state employee who expresses disapproval. In the 1960s, society was pressured to accept all kinds of immoral sexual relationships between men and women. Today we are seeing a new sexual revolution where society is being asked to accept sodomy and same-sex “marriage.” If homosexual “marriage” is universally accepted as the present step in sexual “freedom,” what logical arguments can be used to stop the next steps of incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and other forms of unnatural behavior? It is already being promoted as the next barrier to be bridged. Where does it end ?
Hope that answered your questions.......Because I cannot state it any more clearly than that. "Whew"