Gay Marriage?

If any of you haven't guessed yet, I am not for gay marriage. At least I am not for defining the word marriage to mean anything other than one man one woman.
Civil unions? have at it.
Having the same rights as a married couple? you bet.
a ceremony to honor the union? sure.
But the word marriage? no way. (to be clear, if California voted 'no' on prop. 8 I would have not liked it, but I would have accepted it)
Look, words carry weight. They have meaning and the idea of a heterosexual marriage falling under the same banner as a homosexual union is, well, wrong.
They aren't the same. They are different and though the law and the govt. shouldn't treat homosexual union and marriage differently, our vocabulary should. (except for adoption. Don't agree with gay adoption either)

For example, there are people who try to tell us that boys and girls are the same. That society has forced boys to follow one form of gender rolls and girls to follow another.
If we raised boys, they argue, in taditional girl gender rolls, like buying them a teaset, then the boys would grow up to be more feminine.
Same with girls. Buy them g.i.joes, tomboys.
But they were wrong. Boys were unhappy with teasets, unless they were breaking 'em and girls were dressing up their g.i.joes for teaparties.
Why? Because they are different.
Programmed different.
Think different.
And polite society treats them different.
Therefore, we have different words assigned to each different sex and though the govt. recognizes their equality of rights under the law, our vocabulary recognizes their differences in life under natural law and that is the way it should be.
And that is the way it should be with marriage as well.
So says I.

Now read this