"Anti-marriage" is a completely different, basically unrelated position than "anti-gay marriage," just as, say, "anti-gun ownership" is a completely different position than "only white people should be allowed to own guns." You've presented a coherent, non-bigoted argument for the anti-marriage position; it does nothing to legitimize the anti-gay marriage position.
> You've presented a coherent, non-bigoted argument for the anti-marriage position; it does nothing to legitimize the anti-gay marriage position.
That was already covered. The argument is that allowing gay marriage will reduce support for the anti-marriage position. If gay marriage is denied then supporters of gay marriage will prefer to support the anti-marriage position rather than supporting marriage when they can't participate in it, which is preferred if you're anti-marriage.
Ironically the corollary to this argument is that allowing gay marriage preserves the institution of marriage.
That's a fascinating argument that feels a bit too clever. Do many people actually hold this position, or is it more of an interesting train of thought?
