Why do I oppose gay marriage?
How can I oppose the joining of two mutually consensual parties, who want to be married based on love (but, maybe not always). Why would I be so heartless and discriminatory (everyone should be equal?) How can this be... You may be thinking: he is a religious person, and you would be correct. But, let me explore this topic with you, so you can better understand the insights of my viewpoint (or at least be aware of them).
The basis for my opposing mentality is simple, it is against my personal foundation and morals, isn't that what it always comes down to. But, more than that, I'm against the trickling consequences that will be sure to follow.
You may think that morals are all subjective, but in my mind: they are not. Whether someone believes something to be true or not, doesn't diminish the reality of the matter. Sure, there are different perspectives: but that is just changing the nature of the outlook, not declaring the previous notion as false.
For example: Killing is wrong... Or is it? Perhaps, it is legitimized by the need to protect yourself and your family from being killed? That would be the exception to the rule, which derives from a new perspective.
Now that we covered that, I want to get back on track: people in general, want to live in a world that suites their outlook; Whether that outlook be subjective or not, it is based on their own sense of self (morality). People in support of gay marriage are doing it now; see, we are alike... Sure, people want others to base their reasoning and motivations from a completely logical standpoint. But, it doesn't always work as one intended.
For example: Why should slavery be outlawed? From a completely, logical standpoint (without involving heart and emotions) it seems quite beneficial to mankind. Throughout the ages, using slaves has been beneficial to many cultures. They aid in the development and productivity of the people; they help the advancement of mankind. Sure, there is abuse and neglect and suffering (lost of freedoms): but are those logical reasons? Or are those our morality coming into play... If they made it completely efficient without lost of substance: would there be any moral reason not to do it?
The point I am trying to make is: whether you want to admit it or not, we live by belief systems; perhaps, differentiating systems at that, but still: belief systems. Which brings us to my next point, people stating that gay marriages will have an “equality for all” result are deluding themselves (for reasons coming up).
What makes someone a hypocrite? At it's basic level: saying something and doing another in opposition of it. Or, perhaps, being ambivalently contrasted: and acting like there is none, as you choose the one most beneficial to you and disregard others points of view. Why do I bring this up? Because, having just gays become equal in marriage, while excluding other minorities is, not equality for all.
For example: Are you opposed to other minorities getting married? What about poly-amorous house-holds getting married? What about incest people getting married? What about bestiality people getting married to animals? Here is a controversial one: What about people wanting to marry boys/girls younger than 18? Perhaps, 16, or 14, or 12... (or prearranged marriages) Why are you against any of those minorities getting married (are they based on your morals) Or, if you would support them (would you outright support their cause just like your own, or are you lying?) Yes, this is what makes you a hypocrite, if you are for gay marriage and equality for all (and, you in contrast of that very principle in others, oppress them as you once were.) Or, perhaps, you make yourself feel justified by legitimizing it with some perspective that validates your outlook...
Now, to get back on track again, let's get back to what I meant by: trickling consequences of allowing gay people to get married. In order to be completely equable and fair with the law, you would have to allow other minorities to be-able to be legally married as well. And, that would just amplify the chaos and the changes necessarily to integrate the law (which may not be a bad thing); it would cause more imbalance and turmoil in our society. In addition, procreation would change all together, under the right conditions.
For example: If the majority of people became gay, and wanted to have children: they would have to resort to: Surrogate pregnancies, artificial inseminations, adoptions, and so fourth... (perhaps, cloning and genetics) In order to raise a family. Family values would change in order to adhere to the new trends of our society. People against the new changes would become discriminated against themselves. Without any other recourse, it might erupt into a civil war, if enough people felt strongly about it (and, giving enough time and changes). Of course, some of those activities are already occurring; and, you may not think that is all that bad of a reality. Also, their may be changes in how our genders interacts with one another in the future; and being divided, genders may grow further apart and become segregated (perhaps, even discriminatory).
Sure, these are hypothetical outcomes: which may never take place. Perhaps, the world may become better for those that it suites. But, where do you draw the line at the lost of our moral foundation? I am not advocating hatred or discrimination, or anything negative. You can have differentiating belief systems without malice towards one another. You can understand each others points of views, and not always agree with one another. But, for people who are opposed to it, they will start living in a world that goes against every fiber of their being.