Of course your position appears to be logical, the thing I would ask in response is that do you think that restricting the marriage contract will in any way change personal relationships.
In other words, is it your belief that if gays are prohibited from the legal benefits gained through marriage this fact will somehow be translated as a wake up call to abandon their homosexual lifestyle?
I think we both know the answer is that people will continue to be people and interact with each other as they always have, there is nothing new about homosexuality, it has been with since the inception of humans and will remain with our species forever.
So, if I am correct in my assessment, your position regarding restricting marriage simply becomes an act of punishment for a lifestyle between consenting adults that you deem inappropriate without any accompanying social benefit.
“So, if I am correct in my assessment, your position regarding restricting marriage simply becomes an act of punishment for a lifestyle between consenting adults that you deem inappropriate without any accompanying social benefit.”
How is a lack of marriage a punishment? A lot of people think that divorce is a punishment, and we will surely see divorce among same sex couples if they are allowed to marry.
The State of California already awards all of the benefits of marriage to same sex couples but thus far has not called it marriage. I think that same sex couples have the best of both worlds - the financial and legal benefits of marriage without the stress and strain of divorce.
There are radicals who wish to marry in order to deconstruct marriage. In other words, they want to marry in order to subvert an institution that they think keeps them down. Why? When will these people be happy? We don’t yet know the full ramifications of deconstructing traditional marriage, but children need boundaries and security, not adult experimentation. Do your experimentation outside of marriage if that is what you want.
Perhaps you connect a lack of marriage with self-esteem issues, but the law is not responsible for self-esteem. Homosexuals and lesbians have distinguished themselves in the arts especially but in other careers as well; they just don’t belong in marriage because they do not naturally reproduce. When they do have children, they deliberately deprive a child of either a mother or father. Many options exist for mentoring children - Boys and Girls Clubs, etc. You can’t have it all. People need to leave marriage alone and let it do what it’s supposed to do, but some have a political agenda. In addition, many people have lost sight of the purpose of marriage because of no-fault divorce, the pill, the destruction of the old taboo against sex outside of marriage - the whole sexual revolution.
The government originally awarded benefits to married couples because the government got something extremely valuable back in return - the next generation (of government workers ;-), military personnel and so on). The entire future of society depended on married couples bearing children. Raising a child is extremely costly and time-consuming, demanding sacrifices from caregivers. The government gets nothing back from purely adult relationships. People care for elderly sick parents and receive no benefits. The self-fulfillment and recognition that adults get from adult relationships is no business of the government.
On May 4, somebody posted an article at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2011086/posts . The article is a bit sensationalistic, but it makes the point about gay marriage more quickly than I can.