Originally posted by Only-now I don't think ANYONE here actually read the link I provided did they? So they continually misinterpret what I am saying. Such as the animal thing. I am NOT comparing those two types of marriage...I am saying that once traditional marriage is ruined by allowing gay marriages..others are going to ask for more. The only reason we aren't having a debate about whether or not animals and humans should marry is because someone hasn't asked yet. After gay marriage, SOMETHING like so would come up, and you would see more people wanting that as well. This will just deal the initial blow that will weaken marriage so others can take advantage of it.
I did read it, actually. It seemed... well, not quite like a load of horse droppings, but not too far from it. I personally liked the paragraph about fathers marrying sons and lesbian sisters marrying each other and how they'd all be "gay" marriages. Yeah, and a brother marrying his sister would be a "straight" marriage, just as a guy marrying his mother would, so I didn't really see his point.

His point about changing the meaning of red and green traffic to mean the opposite of what they do now seemed odd as well. It made me think of the situation Sweden was in a few decades ago when we switched from driving on the left side of the road to driving on the right side of the road. When that switch was taken care of, every traffic sign in the entire country had to be changed. This was done during one night (obviously some prior arrangements were done before-hand and the people living here were informed about the switch long before it happened). So, big changes can be implemented quickly. One day, you drove on the left side of the road, the next, on the right side. Today, noone here is confused about which side of the road to drive on (well, apart from the occassional drunk driver or looney, I guess).

And still other customs may have entirely invisible or forgotten or unknowable benefits, which we might not even appreciate until after they were gone. How many social benefits were attached to the evening family meal that no one could have predicted or appreciated before women's liberation and the modern economy eroded its prevalence? Indeed, some recent studies indicate that a significant portion of the obesity "epidemic" is attributable to the decline in home cooking, predominately by housewives. Just imagine the response if critics of feminism had said, "If women join the workforce, kids will get fat and cost us billions in health care."
I think that one stands on its own, really. Heaven forbid men and women should start sharing the responsibility of rearing our spawnlings.

And here, from the end of the fourth paragraph from the bottom:
After all, we were right to abolish slavery as a matter of justice. But the lack of social consensus to do so birthed not only America's bloodiest war but generations of civil discord, which endures today.
Yeah, so the right path isn't always the easy one. Sometimes, people will even hate you for taking it.

It would be nice if people didn't think of me as a "nastie" that's out to "get" their Traditions? and change them into something unholy, though.

But I'm thinking that the more people that are of the opinion that allowing homosexual marriages will ruin the inherent meaning of marriage, the less marriage will mean after it has been legalized. "Oh, those filthy ******s are allowed to do this as well, that makes my marriage something I can't appreciate anymore/as much".

I mean, afterall, only you can destroy the sanctity of your own marriage.