Except, of course, all those times in human history, including ancient history, where same-sex marriages have been recognized.
Yes, I recall going through that list before. As I recall, it's ridiculously small, and includes very few instances in which a homosexual relationship was regarded as equal to a marriage. So, billions of humans, over thousands of years, thousands of cultures and religions, and they all but unanimously thought of marriage as something that happened between opposite sex partners. Why, it's almost as if marriage makes sense that way, and not the other [homosexual] way.
It's almost as if gender were something that simply exists, not just something enforced by culture or religion. You may have heard the phrase "exception that proves the rule." Besides, dude, I never told you there weren't exceptions.
That's downright Orwellian. Government regulates who can get hitched by excluding some consenting adults, people get upset about it, and then you turn it around claim that stopping the government from regulating who can get hitched is getting the government INVOLVED.
Orwellian? You're asking government to call things marriages, when they clearly, as a matter of plain fact, are not. Then you have the nerve to call us bigots, when we point this out.
You're asking for a new class of relationships to be added to those which the government already recognizes. I say "recognize," because our government can't be said to actually regulate marriage, except maybe in the case of minors. Would government stop a man from being married to his mother? Or stop a man from having six wives? I don't see it doing anything but withholding recognition.
The point being, you want government to do something it wasn't already doing. You should have to explain why. I need not offer an explanation, except in the sense that it falls to the non-delusional to help the delusional (you) see reality.
It was already involved. This is weakening it's involvement. getting it in involved in the previously (since Lawrence v Texas) unregulated.
Fixed.
It would be nice to get the government out of the marriage business completely, but I don't see any big push on that any time soon. In the mean time, government needs to stop interfering with the relationships of consenting adults.
And demanding that government get involved in homosexual relationships is so totally the way to make that happen.
I hear a lot more public support for the total deregulation of marriage than I've ever heard for same-sex marriage. There was never a "big push" for same-sex marriages until people starting telling bizarre tales, twisting truth, and calling people bigots when they wouldn't fall for it. The same could have been done for deregulation, but that wouldn't serve the left's agenda. And let's be clear that this is the left's agenda. Homosexuals, like any of their other victim classes, are but useful tools.