|
First of all, I'm just going to point out that that argument is completely illogical. I am fervently for gay marriage being legal and I'm pretty opposed to affirmative action. I do not think Prop 8 was intended to stop California from have quota requirements where, if not enough same sex marriages took place, then heterosexuals would have to start marrying same sex partners. Quotas and special privileges have absolutely nothing to do with the argument in favor of equal rights to get married.
I think that most sexual tastes and behavior are a combination of nature, nurture, self-discipline, and self-indulgence. Some people are naturally more attracted to the same sex and some to the opposite. Some people's life experiences reinforce one taste or the other. Some people feel they should resist certain urges and some do not. This is the same for urges all the way from occasional masturbation to sexually-motivated serial murder. It is all a combination of how one is born, how one has lived, and, yes, choice.
Some people are born with a taste for pedophilia or serial killing or rape and some people's life experiences reinforce or dial back those tastes.
As a society, we need to have laws against pedophilia, serial killing, and rape because those harm other people.
As a society, marriage is a good thing, whether or not it produces children. I think the government should actually exclusively affirm civil unions, as the legal portion is relevant to the world of law, but the spiritual portion should be in the realm of personal choice and religion. That said, society benefits when there are people in it who feel a part of it and feel they have what to lose if they stray outside it. The government gets more money from married people too.
Some people are naturally more monogamous or some are. Despite the irony factor of the Mormon church backing Prop 8, I actually kind of understand how they might be pissy if America was moving towards accepting gay marriage but not polygamy.
|