What's government's interest in outlawing homosexual marriage?

Sorry, but your post was an incoherent mess, and your later one doesn't rescue it.

Once again...

That's plainly incorrect. Gays can call their civil unions whatever they wish to call them. It's called "freedom of speech," but once again, your statement here is about the TERM when elsewhere you claim to be arguing about the institution.

Now you're arguing about the institution, your own personal preference but nothing you can back constitutionally. Our government doesn't exist to protect your religious prejudices but to guarantee equality under the law. Did our government have a right to end Mormon polygamist "marriages"? If you say yes, then you've contradicted your own statement that government shouldn't force conditions contrary to religious beliefs. If you say no, then you're contradicting your own argument about government having the right to reserve the word for a traditional union of man and woman.

So, now it IS about the WORD.

Oh? That's not what your previous sentence indicates.

And now it's NOT about the word, but about the tradition.

Instead of all that semantic flip-flopping why don't you just state your PRECISE stance? You don't mind so much that gays live together and have equal property and cohabitation rights, but you're opposed to government using the WORD "marriage" to describe it because it offends your personal and religious sensibilities. It's ALL about the word, despite your denials. It's petty silliness to expect our government to protect word definitions.

 

so why can't you "marry" your dog? or a duck????????

or marry your sister

or have 6 wives??????

 

That does not change the fact that the primary purpose of marriage is the nurturing and raising of children. The underlying assumption is that it is couples of child-bearing age who normally get married. The few exceptions does not change the underlying assumption. And marriage is not anything you want it to be. The definition of marriage has always been exactly as I described it. This is not my opinion. This has been the case since the institution of marriage. Even couple who have lived together for years without children, will normally marry once children enter into the picture. Marriage is fundamentally about children.

 

If gay marriage is legalized, then your children will be taught in school all about how it is NORMAL for his friend to have 2 dads or 2 moms. The more tolerance there is for that then more and more kids will grow up thinking it is OK for homosexuality. I don't want my kids thinking it is OK. Yes, I know it starts with parenting, but teachers and schools have a lot of influence on young minds also.

 

My husband and I aren't planning on EVER having children. I believe we have just as much right to be married as people who do want babies.

 

I'm sorry, but when an argument contains contradictory components and/or directly leads to contradictions, as yours did, then it's incoherent. And you skipped right over the discussion of Mormon polygamist marriages even though you previously insisted government has no right to force practices contrary to religion.

I'll make it easy here... what property, contractual, taxation, etc. rights given to a heterosexual "married" couple should be denied to a homosexual couple in a government-sanctioned "civil union"?

 

:rofl:

Now how'd you recognize that there pattern, amigo? :lol: