On same-sex-marriage: The gays are not interested in the marriage or serving in US Military. What they want is for Government (which we conservatives “love” so much) to validate their life style, which they themselves know is perverted. That’s why they are looking for a marriage license, and they look at it as a Being Gay License.
However, all that being true, the problem remains is that our government already have managed to mess up the Marriage even not counting the perverts, just like our Gov manages to screw up everything else! What is marriage? its 2 people man and a woman intending to live together,to have relationship together, have children together. Why should government have any say with whom and how I sleep who I love, with whom I have children? marriage fundamentally is between 2 people and G-D, not government. Marriage should have no effect on how much you paying in taxes to IRS, if you able to get some insurance policy, or visit a person in a hospital, or even how your assets are shared. Government should get out of marriage business, and only priests or Rabbis should deal with marriage. You wanna get married Mazel Tov! Go to Rabbi and he will say a blessing give you a pretty piece of paper which you can nail to the wall, you wanna marry a cow, all the best find a (Reform) rabbi and you will be married. What Gov has to do with any of it?! if you want to set up shared property, spousoul support etc.. you register yourself as partnership with the Government. You don’t have to have sex to be in a partnership, roommates can be in civil partnership to share assets, maybe they bought a house together,or a car. Another words the social aspect of marriage should be domain of the Church while the financial should be domain of Government,and it should not be called marriage but partnership,Corporation,etc..
The Gays are just trying to exploit a broken system for their own political ends, however that doesn’t change the fact that the marriage system is broken.
Society consents to elect the government the arbiter of marriage when it fails, because it is the logical, presumably objective, party to do so. (Who else is to be the decider of things that MUST be decided when things go wrong in a marriage or one party dies?) And to arbitrate, it must define the substance of the case: marriage. What it defines (and marriage is ALREADY defined by eons of societies) it has every right to license, which isn't really a "license" in the proper use of the word, but a recording fee.