Here is a much better logistical argument.
1.The government is involved in marriage.
2.All adult citizens of the United States are guaranteed equal protection under law.
3.Therefore, the government has two choices.
A.Not be involved with marriage at all
-OR-
B.Treat all adult citizens equally
This whole debate is not complicated guys. So if you do not like the idea of gay marriage get used to it, because the authors of the constitution laid down the groundwork for this centuries ago.
p.s. as for your "slippery slope" theory about people one day marrying their pets, it should first be noted that a pet does not have a choice in the matter so it would not be able to be defined as marriage. The pet would not even know that it had been married. In other words, that part of your comments is laughable, and can be construed as very rude. Very similar to a comment like this, "I mean, why would anyone be religious, thats just left over tradition from cavemen." Don't be inconsiderate of others please.
1.The government is involved in marriage.
2.All adult citizens of the United States are guaranteed equal protection under law.
3.Therefore, the government has two choices.
A.Not be involved with marriage at all
-OR-
B.Treat all adult citizens equally
This whole debate is not complicated guys. So if you do not like the idea of gay marriage get used to it, because the authors of the constitution laid down the groundwork for this centuries ago.
p.s. as for your "slippery slope" theory about people one day marrying their pets, it should first be noted that a pet does not have a choice in the matter so it would not be able to be defined as marriage. The pet would not even know that it had been married. In other words, that part of your comments is laughable, and can be construed as very rude. Very similar to a comment like this, "I mean, why would anyone be religious, thats just left over tradition from cavemen." Don't be inconsiderate of others please.