It is not an uncommon view of marriage. Legalities aside, many if not most people marry to build families. In this view, marriage serves a purpose that moves an individual beyond his or her own desires and compels the consideration of others.
Understanding that also sheds light on why a good many people oppose the rationales put forward by same sex marriage advocates. Embedded in the arguments that proceed from "I want" is a subtle dismissal and even rejection of the idea of building families and moving beyond the individual "I want."
Jerry's point speaks to exactly that. If same sex marriage advocates would devote their energies to speaking of building families, of adopting children, of reaching beyond the individual desires, that argument will find a much more receptive audience than the current vapid crying "foul!" using a discrimination thesis that proceeds from a definition of marriage that stands at odds with the traditional understanding of the term.
This topic is gay.
A tradition that has served humanity well, on the whole, for thousands of years in a certain form (ie male-female marriage to create families, that most often care for their children), is a tradition that should not be thrown away lightly. Unintended and negative consequences, long-term, are not implausible.
You want civil unions? Have them, I don't care. Just leave the term "marriage" as it has been for millenia.
Fiddling While Rome Burns
Carthago Delenda Est
"I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."
Edited to add: Oh yeah, and I have linked and quoted stats in this thread on how many gay couples would like to adopt, and how many have their own children. The numbers are not insignificant.
Last edited by Redress; 07-05-09 at 08:22 PM.