WessleWoggle said:
The fact that you responded to my parody, rather than the important part of my post, is lame. "Well thought out arguments? I'd like to hear one please. I've never heard an argument that wasn't based on cultural or religious bias."
|
Well, one of the more classical arguments is that the formalization of the relationship between a man and a woman we call marriage is a means to ensure that the paternity of these children is acknowledged, and that they are accepted and supported by the extended family on both sides. While this may seem somewhat outdated today because of DNA testing and child support, no legal entity can force grandparents, uncles, aunts, and cousins to accept these children; and children who are born outside of a marriage are still (generally speaking) ostracised from one side (typically paternal) of their family.
There is a risk that by introducing homosexual marriage that people will become confused about its initial purpose, more people will have children in more unstable relationships outside of marriage, and within a couple of generations the majority of children will have little support from (at least) one half of their extended family.
