Well let's start off with the fact that marriage has already gone through a fundamental transformation over the ages. It started off as a business deal exchanging a piece of property, the woman, from her father to her husband in exchange for money, livestock service. It is now a civil contract between two consenting adults. If someone wants to have their marriage blessed and performed by a priest, minister, rabbi or imam then they are free to do so.TonyC, hope this didn't post twice but hope you still took the time to read it.
From my own observation, more men are averse to homosexuality than women. Even so, most people, both sexes, have become accustomed to this lifestyle in the mainstream whether we all condone it or not. To use a broad brush and paint everyone who is against gay marraige as being against gays is an unfair and inaccurate statement.
Redefining something as stablizing and consistent as marriage in any society sanctioning a man marrying a man and a woman marrying a woman stretches the definition to the point of negating its original intent - the psychological and stablizing factor of children having both a mother and a father.
That certainly doesn't mean all mothers and fathers are good parents any more than gays are not good parents. But adoptive children in a heterosexual relationship is uniquely different in itself. Adoptive children in a homosexual relationship is a rather recent development and it has yet to be determined the long-term social and psychological adjustments.
Children can be as cruel to adoptive children of gay couples as gay children themselves. No matter how many walls have been broken down, it is still considered an alternative and different lifestyle and the number of gay parents are in a small minority.
It would be hard to imagine a child growing up without having any stigma attached to having homosexual parents in contrast to most, if not all, their friends having heterosexual ones.
We have become a society where children are more of an afterthought than the primary consideration. We already see that with the widespread apathy concerning abortion.
We must be very careful or risk unraveling the very fabric of remaining a civilized and structured society. Since we've already become apathetic in preserving human life, once the definition of marriage has no meaning other than a self-serving one as well, the structure and foundation of this last remaining stronghold could easily become a free-for-all mentality and further blur the lines of a civilized society for children. Whitney was right. The children are our future. What we teach them is how they will lead the way.
Any society without boundaries or structure becomes more barbaric than civilized. Rome is the perfect example.
This is where I believe most of us who are against gay marriage stand. I feel fairly safe in speaking for most of them as well.
As the effect on children the American Academy of Pediatrics has weighed in on the subject stating;
“The academy’s new policy statement says same-sex marriage helps guarantee rights, benefits and long-term security for children, while acknowledging that it does not now ensure access to federal benefits. When marriage is not an option, the academy said, children should not be deprived of foster care or adoption by single parents or couples, whatever their sexual orientation….”
“The academy cited research finding that a child’s well-being is much more affected by the strength of relationships among family members and a family’s social and economic resources than by the sexual orientation of the parents.“There is an emerging consensus, based on extensive review of the scientific literature, that children growing up in households headed by gay men or lesbians are not disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents.”
Opponents of marriage equality are simply trying enforce their own beliefs on others.