My views on gay mariage

[Chas]

.. or even a proper reply to points supported improperly.

Improper, please tell me how you think that they are improperly supported. From the beginning of the argument, I have had one support, and one support only. That marriage is an insitution that is regulated by traditions, and that marriage, from the beginning of its existence had one main goal, to provide a safe environment for a child to be concevied, and raised, with a legal/social obligation for both of the parties to look after the child. In short, I have stated that this was the primary goal of the marriage, to provide for the newer generations by bringing two people who are able to procreate together.

I yet have to see an argument that was more anymore proper than mine.
Others have gone about how marriage has changed, how it is a right for everyone, not it's not for everyone. In the old days, and yet still in our country, though you can legally marry, no one will marry you unless you have a proper job, have done your military duty, and many other factors such as how well off your family is, or how less problematic your family is, whether you smoke, drink and etc..
Back then, marriage was something that was regulated by higher standards than today.
Not everyone could marry. But today, marriage is like a game...Therefore you think that gays, who do not meet the least requirements to form a marital couple, meaning, being male and female should marry.
I disagree on the basis I've mentioned above. What really is your standing point?

Marriage is defined and regulated by the state. In the West, that means (generally) a secular state.
Religions can define it however they want, but in civilized countries they are not the state.

Marriage of gay people will soon be legal everywhere in the West. If you don't like that, too bad. But it in no way affects you personally.

We call it human rights and freedom. We call your attitudes bigotry and repression.