Well according to the loving CONSTITUTION, the government has to agree. It's a RIGHT as a U.S. citizen to have that freedom. Rights which gays are unequivocally stripped of.
The government can't persecute them for it, but they aren't required by law to give them marital rights.
Idiot. When you find a certain hair color more attractive than another, that's a NATURAL preference. You know you like a certain trait or characteristic in a person when it stimulates a reaction in your brain saying,
"Hey, I like how brown hair looks! BONER"
Even if loveual preference was completely natural, it still doesn't make same-love intimacy any better. If someone had a 'natural' preference for dogs, there'd be quite the outcry.
And even as you said, you have no problem with a same love couple raising an adopted kid. If that couple being married means having more benefits to give that child a better life, then why deny them that right?
Like I said, I'm fine with two people of the same love deciding to raise a kid. I'm against same-love intimacy because all it accomplishes is it gives the people involved a short bit of pleasure accompanied with risks of injury or sickness to the people involved. It's not too far off from illegal drug usage.
As as for same love intimacy being unproductive, maybe we should ban condoms and all other forms of birth control. If two people have love for fun, it's "unproductive". Hell, let's ban all unproductive things. Video games, GONE. Mentally handicapped children, GONE. Third world countries, GONE. WHY STOP THERE? LETS KILL EVERY HUMAN BEING THAT DOESN'T MAKE THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE!!!
You've taken unproductive from meaning "not resulting in offspring" to "not productive in any way". After you see the difference, this part doesn't have much significance.
And as for heath risks, I'm completely ignoring that statement due to it's complete stupidity.
Because illnesses such as gonorrhea are a myth.
