The only reason the United States government fought for inter-racial marriage was that a particular state banned it. The only reason this became a "civil rights" issue was that a state government interfered in peoples' lives where it had no business doing so.morbo3000 wrote: I do believe, however, that the government has a role in intervening in civil rights issues. I know that's muddy for people who don't believe that gay marriage, . . . is a civil rights issue. But granting that argument, inter-racial marriage, . . . were appropriately fought for by the government.
And no one argued whether the inter-racial marriage was really a "marriage". There was no debate on that point in the Loving vs. Virginia case, for example. Everyone know what a marriage was.
People who don't believe "gay marriage" is a good idea are not out to take away someone's "civil right" to marry. They believe that "marriage", by definition, is a union of a man and a woman, and this man and woman are responsible for raising their biological children. This definition arose all over the world, by virtually every culture. It was not created by any government, church, or legal system. Although most cultures were very aware that homosexuals existed, and some accepted the practice, no one ever came up with the idea that "marriage" is supposed to be a union of two consenting adults.
This new "definition of marriage" could only come about in a society that is obsessed with personal rights, and in a government that is so involved in peoples' lives that it feels it has the authority to determine what a marriage is, and to force everyone to agree with their new definition under threat of a civil rights lawsuit or "hate crime".
And don't forget this little fact. This new notion of marriage will only give the government more authority in determining who are the legal guardians of children. After all, in this new kind of "marriage" children can only come about via the legal system and extra expense. And if required for them, why not for everyone; we should all be equal, shouldn't we? As absurd as this now sounds, our legal system has a habit of taking its "logic" to strange places.