Any time you radically change a contract AFTER millions have already entered it, it is damaging to all who entered it under the previous assumptions.
You buy a Cadillac - and three years later, all Cadillacs are defined down to mean just any GM model. Your “caddy” is devalued post facto……
I agree. But now we need to list specific ways in which the changed contract has injured what centuries has rightly called marriage and is now being redefined.
I believe unnatural marriage makes the culture more dangerous for everything from disease to distorted understandings of gender.
My “cultural danger idea” speaks of injury to the culture, for sure, but it only tangentially grapples with injury to “the institution of marriage.”
Matrimony is defined by the root word for “mother” as being the haven in which protected mothering can take place.
Gay marriage broadens that special preserve in the same way that permitting cattle to forage on a game preserve injures those wild animals that were being fostered. It doesn’t matter that those cattle like pasturage, also. It matters that the wild creatures no longer have a special, caring eye tuned to their unique needs.
I’m just tossing out thoughts here.