I've participated in this debate so many times, I have my argument prewritten :) Here I goooo !
"Homosexual marriages will threaten the sanctity of marriage." I've yet to see how this makes sense. I've also yet to see how marriage is holy or revered in any way in the eyes of the government. For many reasons I don't believe sanctity has anything to do with the legality of marriage. For starts, Las Vegas. Other points include Hollywood rollercoaster marriages and already current high divorce rates. Also keep in mind that homosexuals, regardless of their legal recognition, are still joined in many cases, emotionally, and many such couples have been a unrecognized married couple longer than many straight couples. So how does gay marriage threaten anything about marriage? How is marriage suddenly, in a legal sense, something that has to be protected only in the case of homosexuality?
Let's start with Las Vegas. According to a Las Vegas tourism guide, "adults 18 years of age and older need no consent to be married in Nevada. (ref 1)" The site goes on to give conditions so a 16 year old could be wed, and that a marriage may, and I emphasize may, be denied if proof of age is unavailable. According to another Las Vegas guide, " In 1994, 99,310 wedding licenses were issued in the Las Vegas area (ref 2)." How sacred and planned can these weddings be? What institution of marriage is being respected? The get drunk and marry someone you barely know institution? We all know that has been known to happen, a big example would be the recent Britney Spears marriage that lasted less than 24 hours. I don't see how any respect is taken in those situations, yet they're perfectly legal and recognized. Las Vegas is somewhat famous for it, I mean, doesn't everyone want to be wed by an Elvis? Marriages in Vegas almost make marriage a laughing matter, yet is completely legal. On the other side of things, a gay marriage, a marriage that could be between two people that have been together for most of their lives, isn't legally recognized. Something about this does not add up.
Hollywood, Hollywood, Hollywood. Thanks to Hollywood, divorce can almost be a laugh. Many limelight couples get divorced only after hours, and the press is all over it. What kind of message does this send to people? Millions upon millions of dollars in settlement, usually given to the woman in a marriage, and symbols of the woman being all powerful. Sure, this is great for the woman, but this also encourages divorce, showing that it's not that big of a deal, and if the big wigs can do it all the time, so can we. In Hollywood, marriage is hardly respected. Look at The Donald's breakup with Ivana. Ivana walked away with something like 10 million dollars, easy. Does this kind of message encourage well thought marriages, or the "marry someone rich and take them for all they're worth" message? I choose the latter, and also point it out as another reason marriage is anything but respected, legally, in this country, if these things can happen.
On the same note of divorce, according to DivorceWizards.com, a divorce advisory website, approximately 50% of all marriages will end in divorce (ref 3). Wow. That number is remarkably high, especially considering that is only between straight couples. So how, how in this sense is marriage a revered institution that needs to be protected and respected? How in this sense is marriage threatened by opening up legal recognition to the gay community, that has already coupled without the legal drama behind it? Most couples that rushed to get married in the different states that opened marriage were long time couples. If anything, I feel that nationwide acceptance and legal recognition of gay marriages will reduce the divorce rate. There will be fewer Governor McGreevey's marrying straight to be married and to be granted the rights associated with marriage. Families will be easier to form based on real love, not just need for legal protection. I definitely feel that if gay marriage is counted, that statistic will drop, and marriage may get back on the right track.
I've yet to really figure out the true meaning behind the institution of marriage, especially in legal terms. I understand religiously, how gay marriage could be a threat, as some religions don't believe in it. However, the Church and the state are separate for a reason. Many people in this country have different religious beliefs, and its primarily for that reason that religious views aren't supposed to influence our laws. Though, that's a completely different debate. My point is this: it is the law's job to protect us, whether it be from eachother or ourselves. What is a law opposing gay marriage protecting anyone from? What is it preventing? In the above examples, it is clear to see that marriage is obviously held in low regard in this country, legally speaking, so why are we suddenly trying to put rules and restrictions on it? If any steps should be taken to prevent marriage from going completely haywire, Las Vegas chapels should require something like a week's length of applying for a marriage certificate, and maybe better research behind it. Hollywood shouldn't publicize the great outcomings of divorce either. These are the kinds of things that insult marriage, not two people joining forever, both legally and emotionally.
As I've said before, gay marriages in the legal system is nothing more than granting rights to a group of people that have most likely already coupled, and have felt married already in their own lives. There is no threat to the marriage institution, if anything, the lack of rules on straight marriages and the complete disrespect towards it in places like Hollywood and Vegas is more a threat to the sanctity of marriage than anything. Love is not.
Reference 1:
http://www.lasvegastourism.com/marriage1.htm
Reference 2:
http://www.lvol.com/lvoleg/hist/lvfact.html
Reference 3:
http://www.divorcewizards.com/divorcestats.html