comment

The "we want it because you have it" is exactly the point. Other people have it, so why shouldn't we? Heterosexual couples have the choice of living their lives together without marriage along with the option of becoming married, and to deny homosexual couples the same right is simply unfair. There may be ways to achieve similar legal privileges outside of marriage for gay couples, but marriage is likely to be much simpler and more effective than those methods.

The institutionalization of gay marriage would only diminish the standing of heterosexual married couples among people who essentially choose to be upset by what homosexual couples want, because of what they (the heterosexual individuals) happen to believe for religious or moral reasons. Quite a few people have no issues with homosexual couples regardless of their own sexuality or even religious standing. What you say about familial connections is a matter of values- to me, if individuals choose to spend the rest of their lives together and raise a family, their family is perfectly valid and important. I do not have the same values as you, and all value differences should be respected. The problem is that an anti-gay marriage stance denies people of their choice to live as they want without hurting anyone. If people want to take that stance, they can, but the stance that denies other people rights should not be the basis of law.

If need be, yes, I personally think that something granting homosexual couples the same legal rights as marriage would be enough- But ultimately, people would end up calling at marriage because it is the same thing, and presenting it in such an openly unequal way would be uncomfortable for everyone involved. The reason why homosexual couples deserve the right to get married is because- even with the same rights by a different name- they are being marked out as different, with the implication of somehow being "lesser." And that implication should not be permitted in the interest of fairness.