<p>I would like you to know that I really don’t oppose gay-marriage. I just don’t like gay-marriage if it came in the form of a federal mandate. I’m actually in favor of decriminalizing marijuana, but just as gay-marriage, I wouldn’t be in favor of it being federally mandated.</p>
<p>If gay-marriage was legalized in my state I’d be rather unconcerned. My feelings for the issue run luke warm.</p>
<p>I’m not gay, I have no close gay friends nor have I ever really exposed myself to gay culture. I have a single gay relative who I always liked until he continuously sent me invites on facebook for some show entitled Adonis Thunder Gawds at a gay night club, now things are wierd between us.</p>
<p>Because I’m rather disconnected with the gay community, I feel my opinion holds a bit of water. I’m not blinded by passion for either side, because neither outcome really means crap to me. My honest opinion is that marriage isn’t a right, that most of the desired benefits could be achieved through a civil union (hospital visitation for example) but if a state independently wants to allow gay-marriage they should be granted that sovereignty as long as it’s done democratically.</p>
<p>Any objection I have to gay-marriage comes from issues related to health insurance, SSI, pensions, ect. For example, if a guy marries a guy, the idea of one of them gaining the others pension makes me uneasy, ditto a SSI check. I can’t put a good theory together as to why, but it just doesn’t pass the eye ball test. </p>
<p>I hate to keep going back to my “where does the buck stop” analogy but I think it makes alot of sense. Most people just use a quick “reasonableness” test and ask themselves, “Is this reasonable?” I think for many people, defining marriage between a man and a female - opposite genders that are biologically designed to attract and mate, is reasonable. It’s a pretty good place for a the “buck” to stop. I think passing it further just creates more problems and opens more worm-cans. I’m a believer in the “toothpaste” theory, once toothpaste comes out of the bottle - you can’t put it back in. </p>
<p>Call it a slippery-slope if you like, but I call it precedent. If you set a precedent that marriage can be an open-ended and anyone can marry anyone as long as they are consenting adults, then eventually the whole institution becomes meaningless.</p>