If you are against gay marriage, explain why without mentioning religion

[haxxiy]

Ckmlb1 said:

haxxiy said:

I think it has to do with the definition of marriage. It probably came to be from ancient religious rituals concerning the bonding of two or more people for the purpose of procreation. That would make sense within evolutionary psychology: lots of animals have partners for life so it seems reasonable an institution of some kind would come to exist around it.

Anyways most civilized countries equal civil union and even stable relationship to marriage on grounds of rights and obligations so nowadays it would be mostly a bragging rights award, honestly.

Except polygamy has existed since ancient times, so why is it that when it comes to same sex couples it's something that's against the 'tradition' of marriage (whatever that means)? Divorce didn't exist until somewhat recently in human history, why is that allowed since it destroys the 'tradition' of marriage?

I did mention 'two or more people' exactly because of that; writing 'one men and one or more women' would be too long and I'm lazy haha. Because of course there are some who practice polygyny, that's hardly the norm among mammals, unfortunately, who have to handle all these alpha males and their bravado. Perhaps, but I'm talking out of my ass here, the first marriages were a sort of ritual where one or more women entered a certain men's possession. 

About the divorce thing, the only thing I can think of is that it doesn't destroy the definition of marriage per se - much like temporary rulers can be a leadership as effective as any monarch - actually it happened way more often than it was reported mostly because of female (of female-blamed) infertility and accusations of adultery.

Of course I was not exactly defening the first point as mine per se, but mostly showcasing a possible secular alternative to religious arguments concerning the subject.