And in their opinion, and evidently yours, the only may to make it formal is to hijack a label used for millenia to mean something totally and permanently impossible between two people of the same sex?
Why is that particular word so essential to the perverts? Might it be the desire to destroy the normal as a means of lowering the standard?
I do not support gay marriage as an institution to be a mirror image (in terms of legal rights) of ordinary heterosexual marriage. I support civil unions with limited rights (power of attorney or hospital visitation rights).
The reason I support this is to encourage homosexuals to be less promiscuous and to encourage them to take care of each other. There are many gay couples now who are in decades-long relationships. Many of these relationships are "open" but some of these are not. I have old friends from my graduate school days who have been together for 25 years, and they have nothing to do with the "gay culture", correctly viewing it as dangerous and vile.
I worry that same-sex unions of any kind will serve as advertising for the gay culture, that it will put a stamp of normality on behavior that is dangerous and unhealthy. But I think the undeniable fact is that that culture will be there regardless, and same-sex unions will serve as healthier alternative to the gay culture. The over-riding fact is this: A recent study indicated that 25% of the sexually-active urban gay population has HIV. Anything that encourages gay men to be non-promiscuous is a good thing.