We can if we want to. Political freedom.
these people want to be recognized by the state so they can have the same rights as everyone else in terms of taxes, benefits, etc...
No, they don't. They want the State to recognize and "sanctify", viz. by sanctioning, their couplings, as a countervailing sanction against the Levitical and New Testament moral sanctions against their homosexuality.
They want marriage because they want to rebuke and silence those who reject homosex as immoral, amoral, and abominate.
if anyone tells me why they should not be extended these same privileges then i will listen.
This is the homosexuals' argument, and a dishonest one. The two percent, the proponents of radical change, bear the onus of attempting to prove their case to the rest of us, not we to them. Nice try, though.
one thing though: you may not bring religion into the argument at all.
You wish! Nice of you to offer to make the rules for all the rest of us, though. I'll argue anything I want, thanks.
then there is the argument that marriage is defined the way it is so that a man and woman can raise productive children. this seems to hold little water. why, then, isn't there such an uproar about divorce, out of wedlock children, or single parent households in general? it is because these situations have been around for so long people have gotten used to it and have accepted them.
basically, for me, i see it this way: the arguments being used today against same-sex marriages are the same arguments that people used when it came to interracial/interreligious marriages in the past. this is simply another stepping stone, and in another 15-20 years same-sex marriages will be as common as the union between a jew and a christian or a black person and a white person. i am not saying i agree with same-sex marriage. but if we, as republicans, espouse freedom over governmental controls then why would it be such a big deal for the states to recognize a new form of union?
again, i argue these points with no regard to religion whatsoever. therefore, if you choose to interject religion, then my argument can be discounted on any number of points and i respect that.