Gay Marriage Should Be Legalized In America

I'm not saying it should be illegal for infertile couples to marry, just that there is little point as marriage is a social institution designed to ensure the best environment for raising children. You may disagree by saying it's just about love, but that's only because society presents it that way in order to ensure that people who marry stay married. I see your point about benefits of marriage, but in the UK there is a system called a 'civil partnership' which gives all the rights you mentioned, but to homosexual couples. Marriage is not needed in order to provide those benefits. Also, I accept you are right about bestiality, I know little about the subject so I would be digging a deeper hole for myself if I did continue :) 1st cousin marriage is not the incest that people worry about the most, it's legal in those 20 states because it is a grey area. However, if two people in a brother/sister relationship observe gay marriage being legalised, they have every right to protest ask: 'if homosexuals can change marriage to suit their relationships, why can't we do it?' I agree that in some cases of incest one partner can suffer emotional damage, but that can occur in any type of relationship (albeit at a lesser extent). Also, there are lots of other cases of incest where both partners suffer no emotional damage and would therefore be encouraged by gay marriage legalisation to lobby for incestuous marriage. In regards to polygamy, I disagree with it. That is probably why I fear a slippery slope going there whereas you may not. However, debating the morality of polygamy is, as you said, a debate for another day. I am not saying that there is something wrong with a masculine female of a feminine male, but they will doubtless lead a more difficult life because of it. Most men will not be attracted to masculine females, causing the latter to become bitter and possibly a misandric. There's a reason that many feminists are masculine. S feminine male will often be downtrodden by his stronger counterparts, possibly even bullied as well. The case also applies that women are generally not attracted to feminine men, which could therefore lead to bitter, entitled men. If a gay marriage will not result in children, there is no reason why they should be married in the first place instead of having a civil partnership. "When they are taught from a young age that marriage = love, what will they think when they learn that their parents are not married?" This point is irrelevant to my argument, because I am also gay people raising children. To conclude, you make a strong case for gay marriage. However, I think there are alternatives that would suit both homosexuals and conservatives. Want inheritance/tax-sharing? Have a civil partnership. The reason I am against it, aside from it being unnecessary, is that marriage is a contract that a man and a woman sign to bond them together in the eyes of society. Married couples signed this contract knowing what it was, yet if government changes it, they are changing what these married couples signed up to. It's like someone donating to a charity that supports dementia, before the charity changes to support stem cell research and continues to use your money. Finally, if the definition of an institution is changed at the whim of the people, then it loses its value. To use another analogy, what credibility would a political party have if what they stand for is constantly changed?