Hmm, I'm going to chime in on this once and then leave it at that. It is _obvious_ that gay marriage should not be banned. Gays should be given equal rights as normal citizens, because they are.

There's not even significant academic debate on the subject. Academics just don't see the point in debating it. And if an academic doesn't see the point in debating something, you know it's got to be pretty solid. It's all a bunch of political rhetoric to play off of people's fears and naive/ignorant beliefs founded upon the pathetic attempts at science of 5000 year old agrarian societies.

As outlined in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, there is a fundamental right to marry. It is not defined between a man and a woman. Therefore, it is against international law and human rights norms to ban gay marriage. In the legal history of the United States, it is only in the past few years that people thought that gay marriage was something wrong. Which is why this is such a big issue. The laws are having to be changed to ban it. Regardless of what you may _think_ about the exclusivity of marriage to heterosexuals, our legal history is clear, marriage has been defined between two people with _NO_ reference to sex.

Addressing the gayness is wrong, unnatural, and other such statements. Studies going back many, many years have repeatedly shown that homosexual behavior occurs at a fairly constant rate throughout history and across cultures. It's hard to believe that this is a coincidence and has convinced everyone who looks at the evidence with an open mind that being gay is not necessarily a choice. Some people hit puberty and are attracted to the opposite sex, and some to the same sex. Why this occurs is much less clear, but it is obvious that it is not unnatural.

As for biblical references as to why it's wrong. I might remind you that the bible is fiction. While you may hold yourself to some inconsistent philosophy that can be drawn from the stories in it (though that's not to say the stories may not be based on fact, but certainly all of them are not), you do not have the right to hold others to that philosophy. In fact, you have a civil obligation _NOT_ to hold others to that philosphy. It's called the modern secular state. Early Modern Europe discovered for the rest of the world how badly religious states can mess with people's lives through terribly oppressive rule and deadly war. If you don't like fundamentalism in the Arab world, don't bring it here, please. Again, the adam and eve analogy, please, be serious, _obviously_ that's empty rhetoric. one word: Evolution. I'm sure someone will try to come back and say, oh, but a man and a woman have a special bond b/c they can procreate. big deal. if marriage was all about procreating, the host of rights associated with it wouldn't be granted and there would be laws about requiring married couples to have children. Procreation and marriage are, in the end, unrelated.

So, allowing the LGBT community to marry on the same basis as hetero sexuals a) not only does not diminish the institution of marriage, but fortifies it and makes it stronger by allowing it to be opened to all who want to marry. worried about things that weaken marriage, go after the 50% of adults in this country who have been divorced. b) there are fundamental obligations vis-a-vis human rights to allow LGBT persons to marry. even if everyone in the society but those two people didn't want them to marry, the existence of this fundamental right protects their ability to bond, not only emotionally, but legally.

i could go on, but i think that's enough.

edit: furthermore, from the point of view of bush's recent announcement, this would the the _first_ amendment to the constitution that would serve to diminish the rights of American citizens. Considering his already pitiful record on human/civil/constitutional rights, do you really want a leader like this making a decision of that great of significance for you? Do you even want an amendment to the Constitution that is designed to DECREASE rights. Whatever happened to the land of the free?!?!?!!/