I suppose if siblings want to be married but not have sex, and not have any children between them, I agree with you. But if they have children there is all kinds of opportunity for gene damage, and therefore it does harm someone. So I guess in my mind one of the reasons for allowing a union to be called a marriage is the opportunity to allow that couple to form a family unit.
Why can't gay couples who want to be together simply call it something else, like a unification, or just say they have tied the knot? They could just legally change their names & wear wedding bands if they wanted. Probably one big reason is that they want their union recognized by a number of organizations such as insurance companies, the state, or adoption agencies. And if that's the case, then they should work towards reform for those organizations to recognize their union -- rather than banging their heads against walls that will likely take years, if at all, to come down.
|