Are not the "body parts" sufficient?
Our rights should not depend on what's in our underwear.
I'll take that to mean you can't come up with a rational argument against gay marriage.Is it not the joining of certain "body parts" and the natural result, that provides the biological foundation to marriage?
Appealing to biology is logical though.
"Sense" that you wish to acknowledge, and doesn't undermine your position....no.
Perhaps you can answer the questions I posed.
If its the consensus of society that marriage is simply a union of two consenting adults, there's no need to prohibit any two person, consenting adult, union, including blood relatives. Why should it matter who marries who, or who can't marry who?
Non sequitur.Your argument seems to be no restriction, except possible number of participants, among consenting adults.
If that is so, why bother licensing marriage at all?