Replies

I won't attempt to argue with your opinion that the gov't should remove itself entirely from the business of marriage. That's consistent with libertarian thought. (I don't agree with it, but no need to get into that now.)
you'll be deemed a kook, and rightly so....
I've been deemed much, much worse for being pro-life, so I can live with that. I'd like to know why you would agree with them. If I take the conservative position that the encouragement of the institution of marriage is a legitimate role of gov't, what should be my reason or it's involvement, if not to encourage couples to bring children into, and raise them in, a proven, stable environment?

If I take the conservative position that the encouragement of the institution of marriage is a legitimate role of gov't, what should be my reason or it's involvement, if not to encourage couples to bring children into, and raise them in, a proven, stable environment?

If that's your position, then you are guilty of discriminating against taxpaying gay citizens by unjustly denying them the benefits of marriage. That's the problem--not the "kids in a stable environment" part...