[scripter]

Rhetoric that says that homosexuals want to destroy an institution by joining it is bound to fail.

I don't know if that's true but it's definitely something to consider.

And I have yet to see any way that someone else's "marriage", or civil union, or domestic partnership takes anything away from a man and woman who want to live a traditional style of life.

One argument I've seen is that gay marriage might cheapen traditional marriage as counterfeit money might cheapen real money. Realizing you've seen this before, I think some readers may not have seen this.

Some see gay marriage as opening a door to any type of marriage:

• Many men to one woman
• many women to one man
• brother to brother
• father to daughter
• mother to son
• grandmother to grandson
• etc.

Would gay marriage open the door to anything goes? I don't know, but the idea of gay marriage seems to be skating on thin ice.

Here's a link with some additional thoughts: Questions and Answers: What's Wrong With Letting Same-Sex Couples "Marry?"

[himno hero]

.....father to son, nephew etc

redefine " dad, you're the best!"

[hunter112]

One argument I've seen is that gay marriage might cheapen traditional marriage as counterfeit money might cheapen real money.

Bad analogy, as nobody's marriage is "currency". Currency is valuable because it is what we exchange with other people for what we want. A marriage has value primarily for the two people in it. Yes, marriage benefits society, but unmarried people have value to society as well. Often, without kids to raise, they are the ones who do the volunteer work that so much of our collective well being rests on.

I went to the website you suggested, and its arguments are only two points: 1) Same sex marriage is not marriage because there needs to be a man and a woman, and 2) Same sex marriage is wrong because homosexuality is wrong.

Argument number one is definitional in nature, and clearly, the debate over gay marriage is trying to change the definition. If we say that only cars can use the carpool lane, then by definition, a motorcycle cannot. However, if we change the definitions of vehicles permitted to use the carpool lane, we certainly can add motorcycles.

Argument number two is well and good for people who oppose homosexuality for either aesthetic or religious reasons, but the numbers of people feeling so inclined is dropping. I had a good Mormon friend of mine telling me the other day about a conversation he had with a young missionary, who was somewhat open to a "live and let live" standard regarding homosexuality. Now, for a young man raised in the cradle of the LDS church to be that accepting, that ought to tell you which way things are going on this issue with young people everywhere.

If arguments against homosexual marriage are to prevail, they need more grounding than the above arguments, and the "slippery slope" theory, as well.