There is no logical reason why gay marriage should be banned

Red is blue. Red is blue. Red is blue. Now look around. Is everything that was red now blue? I didn't think so. Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true. "All your arguments have an inherent flaw and that's that they assume homosexual marriages will always be small in percentage compared to heterosexual marriage and so wouldn't disturb society at large. In fact, this assumption itself indicates that you consider this type of relationship an exception and not norm. Let's say, for a moment, we assume that logically there is nothing wrong with homosexual marriages. Now it means we should not have any issue if everyone around opts for that type of relationship." First, whether or not homosexual relationships are the exception or the norm is irrelevant. Second, you seem to be operating under the false assumption that people "opt" for one sexual orientation or another. They do not. For instance, when did you opt to be heterosexual? Quod erat demonstrandum. Though people do choose whether or not to act on their sexual desires, banning gay marriages is not going to magically make homosexuals want to act heterosexually. "But this type of reproduction system doesn't ensure proper support system to younger generation that existing family-system provides; and which is based on heterosexual relationship. In heterosexual relationship, a kid gets required support from it's parents because it belongs to them -- there is a natural bond of love that ensure this support." Again, you make the false assumption that a family system is required to properly raise children. I have already demonstrated that this is not true. It is quite possible to raise children outside of a family system, or within a family system based on a homosexual relationship. There is no less a supportive bond of love between homosexual couples than heterosexual couples. Furthermore, many married parents continue to raise children even when they are no longer in love. "Now yes, there might be species which do not have family system in their worlds but as an intelligent species, human beings have accepted family-system because we see a value in it." That just doesn't make any sense. There are numerous non-human species that raise young within family systems, demonstrating that family systems have nothing to do with human intellect. Humans did not choose to live in families; they do so because it is part of their instinct. Family system provide practical security, but they are not strictly necessary. "Having sex is different than marriage. If two homosexuals have sex then that fact itself doesn't disturb the family system. But when we consider marriages between two people of same gender, it certainly affects the well-established family-system." Again, how does this "disturb" anything? How does the act of a homosexual couple marrying deter heterosexual couples from marrying? You keep repeating the same illogical arguments, even though I have already revealed their flaws. You are banging your head against the wall. I submit that your views do not come from logic at all, but from petty bigotry seeking to justify itself as logic. Be advised: the vail is extremely transparent.