What % are gay in America? About 3%. What % want to get married? Let me throw out a number, a guess. 20% I pick a low number, because most men are horndogs (or would like to be if not constrained by societal pressure, religious morality etc), most gay men are VERY promiscuous. The average gay man, according to surveys, have had hundreds of lovers. Not marriage material. So maybe 20% of 3% of the population would be in a gay/lesbian marriage, that is .6%
What % would be likely to be involved in a 5th amendment situation? Let's say 20%. Obviously, any of these numbers can be argued. so 20% of .6% =.12%
So for the benefit of about .12% of the population, you would discard millenia of tradition, tradition that a solid majority of people want to see untouched.
For .12% you would go against the religious beliefs of the majority of the country. You would contribute to the weakening of the foundations of an institution that is CRITICAL to children, and to the mainenence of a society that is not totally dependent on the govt (face it, without families, welfare becomes "daddy").
This is why I question your motives, there is no logic to counter this. I cannot explain it any better, and I find it hard that someone would need this much of a breakdown to get it.
First of all, it doesn't matter how many members of the population are receiving unequal treatment. If something is unfair and it affects a portion of the population, that must be changed.
Secondly, allowing gays to get married does not destroy marriage. Just because it is a tradition does not mean it should not be touched. As I have said repeatedly, I will say again, appeals to tradition are logical fallacies. Just because something was done in the past for years does not make it right. There used to be laws on the books saying homosexuality was illegal, and would sentence people to death. Those laws were not just. In addition, I "would go against the religious beliefs of the majority of the country" because as it states in the first amendment, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." Laws are not to be based off of religion.
Now, here is where I can understand your point. I am opposed to homosexuals getting married in Synagogues and Churches and if I was religious, I would not join a congregation that specifically goes against its religious text. If it is so offensive to for gays to call what they have marriage, which has religious connotations, then the government should not be giving out marriages. Call what you get from the government a civil union, because that is what it is, and give it out to everyone. That way, everyone is assured of receiving equal treatment, and should a new law or new court ruling come out relating to civil unions, everyone gets affected by it in the same way.
Next, what I am pushing does not contribute to the breakdown of family. Families are not going to start dissolving because all of a sudden homosexuals can get married. In addition, homosexuals will have biological children regardless of whether or not they can get married. The only thing, like someone said, gays will try to adopt children. However, I will oppose them there because the psychological effects on children have not yet been studied. But just because I oppose them on that issue, does not mean that they should receive different treatment from heterosexual couples.