I am trying to point out that my focus is on HOW WE THINK ABOUT WHAT MARRIAGE IS, rather than on specific things like "What gay marriage will do to so-and-so's marriage." This is why I am emphasizing terms like "idea, principle, concept," etc. How we think about what marriage is, is the topic, and NOT what that concept IS at the moment. However, I've said it's first and foremost about heterosexual union, and the PRINCIPLE of natural reproduction, which gays are in PRINCIPLE incapable of. Extending marriage to gays will change that PRINCIPLE in people's minds. The concept of marriage includes other factors of course, the extended-family/social factor for instance, but heterosexuality and the principle of natural reproduction are fundamental.
Whose concept and ideas of marriage will be changed?
What is "traditional" marriage?
If you want to get really technical, marriage USED to be an institution where a woman was considered property of the husband. Marriage USED to be dictated by state and political reasons rather than love and affection.
The "ideas and concepts of marriage" have ALREADY CHANGED.
What it really comes down to, though, is that the STATE, being representative of every citizen, MUST be secular and neutral. There are NO logical reasons to abolish gay marriage from a secular standpoint. As far as the state is concerned, marriage is a simple contract granting exclusive rights (medical decisions in case of incapacitation, inheritance, joint property ownership, etc.). On that basis, there is absolutely zero difference between a heterosexual or homosexual marriage.
The Church can recognize or NOT recognize marriage however it chooses - religious marriage being wholly different by necessity from state marriage. The Roman Catholic Church has a long history of deciding which marriages it recognizes and which it does not. This can apply to homosexual marriage as well - if your faith believes it to be evil, then your faith does not have to recognize its legitimacy.
You do NOT, however, have any right whatsoever to legislate your beliefs. You opposition is based on religious concerns, and you are by all means entitled to them. But your religious concerns are IRRELEVANT to people who do not share your beliefs. You have no more right to disallow gay marriage than a homosexual majority would have the right to abolish heterosexual marriage.
Arguments against gay marriage are all religious in nature, thinly veiled by unfounded assertions that gay marriage will somehow lessen heterosexual marriage. The only "evidence" supplied is either "The Bible says it's wrong!" or, as you yourself said, "it violates the principle of marriage, and we may not see its effects right away, but if we allow this it will be bad! You'll see!" You, of course, have no evidence to back up this claim.
As far as your suggestion that marriage is:
...first and formost about heterosexual union, and the PRINCIPLE of natural reproduction, which gays are in PRINCIPLE incapable of.
Ha! What about infertile couples? If marriage is all about reproduction, and gays shouldn't be allowed to marry because they are incapable of reproducing, does that mean infertile marriage should be abolished as well? What about people who marry for reasons wholly different from having children? If I and my girlfriend don't want to have children, should we not be allowed to be married despite our feelings for each other? Your argument is ludicrous.
It’s no different from anti-mixed-race marriage discrimination. It has all of the same arguments — the Bible says it’s wrong, the kids will be stigmatized, it’s not traditional marriage. And it’s just as bigoted. You are entitled to your bigoted opinions, Faith. But you and those like you have no right to force your bigoted beliefs on anyone else.
Marriage, at it's true core, is all about two people who love each other and want to be committed to each other on a higher level than an unmarried relationship. As far as the state is concerned, that should be the only criteria. The Church can choose not to recognize whatever marriages it wishes, on its own, and wholly separate from the concerns of the state.
™ Version 4.2
