Why do you feel a need to protect gays from something a "danger" that is available to all heterosexuals? Imagine what would happen if you expose all heterosexuals to the hazards of an alienation of affections suit? Oh wait, we're already exposed to it.<quoted text>Divorce maintains consent in marriage; if same sex marriage was licensed I believe the left would attack the consent standard next.
Same sex marriage could harm homosexuals with suits of alienation of affection. Imagine what would happen if every homosexual would become liable for financial damages after a casual tryst.
Same sex marriage is bad because it harms gays.
Oddly enough, until you mentioned it I'd not been aware of this scurge. I'll just have to assign it to the same heap of nothingness that the epidemic of forced same sex prison marriages in Canada you entertained us with in the recent past. Oh BTW, do you ever bother reading your own links? I found the second paragraph to be quite informative:
"Alienation of affections was first codified as a tort by the New York state legislature in 1864, and similar legislation existed in many U.S. states in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Since 1935, this tort has been abolished in 42 states, including New York. Alienation is, however, still recognized in Hawaii, Illinois, North Carolina, Mississippi, New Mexico, South Dakota, and Utah."
This is vintage law that fell out of favor in all but 6 states by 1935. So the only gays that need to worry about it are those living in those six states. I'm sure they shake in fear over the prospect.
"Divorce maintains consent in marriage..." Divorce mainains a casual approach to the notion of marriage. It deletes the bit about parting only in death from the vows. Abolishing divorce doesn't abolish consent in marriage, it might make people take it a little more seriously. Not that I'm advocating doing away with divorce by any means. I'm all for the availability of divorce. I wouldn't be married to my wife without her being divorced from a p previous marriage.
I would like to hear you expand on your fear that liberals would attack "consent standard next." However, I'm almost certain you won't provide a supporting argument for the notion.