I’m not exactly sure how to respond, but I feel like I have to. Now, I’m from San Francisco – born and raised; and in my eighteen years, I’ve accepted homosexuality as a normal part of my day-to-day dealings.
That said, marriage is a governmental contract. A state should be allowed to set its own definition of the contract, its terms, and, yes, its conditions.
The assumption in heterosexual marriage is that you’re probably going to have children. After all, you’re intentionally pairing people who have two very necessary components of procreation. Why shouldn’t the government create a contract that fosters the growth of its society? That’s common sense. It’s not the goverment’s job to pat Ricky and Raul on the back and say, “Hey, fantastic work, gentlemen – and congratulations.” It exists to create policies that encourage society’s, you know, continued existence…and from what I hear in history class, that’s pretty important.
