What is normal? I think its pretty clear that many people do not define homosexual activity as normal, and do not view what they want to do as exactly the same.
What is normal, eh? A very difficult question to answer in the abstract. I suppose in the context of the present discussion, it would mean heterosexual, as opposed to homosexual. At least, that is what I take it to mean when people talk about normal in this context. I put it in quotes in an effort to show that I don't think there is necessarily anything normal about heterosexuality or abnormal about homosexuality.
In one sense, normal means conforming to the actions of the majority. This is what dictionary.com says:
-adjective
1. conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural.
2. serving to establish a standard.
3. Psychology.
a. approximately average in any psychological trait, as intelligence, personality, or emotional adjustment.
b. free from any mental disorder; sane.
4. Biology, Medicine/Medical.
a. free from any infection or other form of disease or malformation, or from experimental therapy or manipulation.
b. of natural occurrence.
5. Mathematics.
a. being at right angles, as a line; perpendicular.
b. of the nature of or pertaining to a mathematical normal.
c. (of an orthogonal system of real functions) defined so that the integral of the square of the absolute value of any function is 1.
d. (of a topological space) having the property that corresponding to every pair of disjoint closed sets are two disjoint open sets, each containing one of the closed sets.
e. (of a subgroup) having the property that the same set of elements results when all the elements of the subgroup are operated on consistently on the left and consistently on the right by any element of the group; invariant.
6. Chemistry.
a. (of a solution) containing one equivalent weight of the constituent in question in one liter of solution.
b. pertaining to an aliphatic hydrocarbon having a straight unbranched carbon chain, each carbon atom of which is joined to no more than two other carbon atoms.
c. of or pertaining to a neutral salt in which any replaceable hydroxyl groups or hydrogen atoms have been replaced by other groups or atoms, as sodium sulfate, Na2SO4.
-noun
7. the average or mean: Production may fall below normal.
8. the standard or type.
9. Mathematics.
a. a perpendicular line or plane, esp. one perpendicular to a tangent line of a curve, or a tangent plane of a surface, at the point of contact.
b. the portion of this perpendicular line included between its point of contact with the curve and the x-axis.
In the context of gay marriage, the sense that I get is that most people who use the word give it some kind of implicit negative connotation. Homosexuals aren't "normal," they aren't like the rest of us. I put quotes around the word to try to show that I don't accept the idea that homosexuality is abnormal in any significant sense.
Certainly what homosexuals want to do is not exactly the same in every way, or they wouldn't be homosexuals, would they? However, I have never spoken to a homosexual who wanted to get married who gave a reason any different from the various reasons I chose to get married. Are there some homosexuals who want to marry for different reasons? Are there some who want to marry in an effort to change society, to try to make homosexuality more acceptable? It's a big world out there, I'd be quite surprised if there weren't some people who wanted to get married for that reason. But I believe that the vast majority who want to marry want to do so for reasons no different from those of most heterosexuals.
Can you think of other groups that might want to declare their love and devotion in the same way that "normal" people do, but you (or most people) would not want to give them such ability?
Possibly. So what?
There are no logical reasons to proscribe any basically consensual activity. Yet it happens all the time. I think you are going to have to aim at a larger target first. Must laws be based on logical foundations? If so, what are they?
If this is not resolved for everyone, there is no real need for any particular group to defende their choice on such grounds.
I see. So if there is one law out there that cannot be supported on a logical basis, we shouldn't ask that any laws be based on logic. Sorry, that doesn't follow for me. By that logic, why not reinstate miscegenation laws?
To me, it's no answer to the request for a logical basis for making a particular distinction to say there are other laws that are equally illogical. I asked for a logical reason to make a distinction between gay marriage and straight marriage because this is a thread about gay marriage. If you would like to start separate threads for any other type of marriage, I'd happily discuss whether there is a logical basis, or any other basis, for such distinctions in those threads. In the alternative, if you'd like to start a thread about the need for a logical basis for any law that proscribes consensual activity, I'd address those issues in that thread.
Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin
™ Version 4.2