There are of course other articles from other magazines, but I didnt have time to research them. I was already familiar with the Orson Scott Card article.
One thing to keep in mind is that heterosexual marriage, and, in the Christian era, monogamous marriage, has been the way in which families and civilizations have been maintained for nearly all of recorded history.
While many societies have tolerated homosexual behavior, such as ancient Rome, and even some of the societies mentioned in the Bible, none have normalized it by making it the equivalent of marriage. For society to survive, marriage–real marriage–was a necessity. It’s only in the past 40 years or so that any society has thought of making gay marriage the equivalent of actual marriage.
When that happens, real marriage gets devalued, and people simply no longer marry. The live together, they have a variety of sexual liaisons, but they don’t marry, and societal stability suffers.
I might also add that the arguments made for gay marriage could also apply to pedophile marriage. I don’t equate the two. But I can see where an organization like NAMBLA might like ‘equal rights’ just as much as gay couples.
They would argue that their own sexual orientation is just as inborn as homosexuality, and that they ought to have the right to express it and to marry their lovers.
It will be argued that it is illegal and the ‘lovers’ are underage children. But they would argue, and probably have, that children who are older than the age of reason should not be denied the right to choose to marry an older adult, and that the state should not have the right to interfere. They have already argued that the age of consent ought to be lowered to around 12. (After all, in some states, minor chldren have the right to obtain an abortion without parental consent. The reasoning would be similar.) It may sound outrageous, but I can see NAMBLA making exactly this argument.
