How? How does allowing gays and lesbians equal access to legal, civil marriage make the concept of legal marriage "meaningless"?
If I redefine the term "automobile" to include bath mats and throw rugs, then the term no longer has a specific and viable meaning.
Interesting analogy...but stupid.
People said the same thing about interracial marriage...that it would "degrade the institution of marriage". They said things like:
“natural instinct revolts at it as wrong.”
“a degraded and ignoble population incapable of moral and intellectual development.”
“necessarily involves (the) degradation” of conventional marriage, an institution that “deserves admiration rather than execration.”
“When people (like this) marry, they cannot possibly have any progeny,” wrote an appeals judge in a Missouri case. “And such a fact sufficiently justifies those laws which forbid their marriages.”
A Georgia court wrote that such unions are “not only unnatural, but … always productive of deplorable results. They are productive of evil, and evil only, without any corresponding good … (in accordance with) the God of nature.”
Did any of that happen when interracial marriage bans were overturned?
Sooooo clearly not true. Yes, we can get certain legal protections for our families...at great cost and still they don't come anywhere near to the protections and benefits afforded people who are legally married. Taxes alone are a nightmare for the gay and lesbian couple. There are over a thousand federal rights, benefits and privileges afforded married couples that gay married couples don't have access to.
We want to get married for the EXACT same reasons that heterosexuals do. Are you legally married? Why did you get legally married when you could, instead, just draft up dozens of legal documents at a cost of thousands and thousands of dollars?
It is not being "redefined". The definition is still a legal contract between a couple. It will be EXPANDED to include gays and lesbians, not "redefined".
How is having the EXACT same legal document a "special privilege"? Equality isn't a special privilege.
No, I think it is you who have a shock coming. Ready?
Since when? When did the "gheys" stop having children? Last I checked, more and more gay couples are raising children. The new census should provide some interesting numbers once all the results have been released. I have two children myself. Why is my family not deserving of the rights, benefits and privileges of legal, civil marriage. You have yet to provide any kind of answer that will hold up in a court of law.
Do you seriously look at things in such simplistic terms?
During the rise of "no fault" divorce, many warned that it was devastating to the family unit. The flippant left retorted that "no one is going to divorce who wouldn't anyway." But decades later we see the depth of the devastation. What it did was undermine the institution - which is again the goal.
ROFLMAO...you see the struggle for marriage equality as gays wanting to destroy and "undermine" the institution rather than their true goal which is to have equal access to that legal, civil union and you call MY views "simplistic"? Should I call the doctor for your irony poisoning?
So in fact, you know full well that the public opposes your plans to redefine marriage, and you seek legislation from the bench to crush the voice of the people and force your will on all.
They don't anymore. Polling shows strong support for marriage equality in California and it really doesn't matter. We should not be voting on civil rights issues. Did you know that interracial marriage did not enjoy majority support until almost 20 years after the Supreme Court ruled bans on it unconstitutional? That's right...according to Gallup, a majority of Americans did not support interracial marriage until the early 1990s.
Bigotry is nothing new and bigotry doesn't play well in a court of law.