And I suspect that the same arguments were once made against interracial marriages, and 40+ years after Loving v. Virginia, there’s not a rash of people marrying animals or sibling marriages. Yeah, one crackpot woman married a dolphin a few years back. And sure, people will have "wedding ceremonies" between pets, but I don’t think any of these folks expect legal rights out of these unions. Same-sex couples would like to have the legal rights and responsibilities of marriage, including the right to marry whom they love.
References :

There is no inalienable right to marriage, the founding fathers never mentioned it. Gays should have the same civil rights as in civil unions, but marriage is going to far against TRADITIONALISM. There is no logical reason to change it now.

If you disagree give me some logical reasons rather than media nonsense & emotional histrionics?
References :

So you would agree then that society sets boundaries on what is socially acceptable. It’s not up to the individual.

Gay people say is "What is the harm as long its two consenting adults who love each other?" Well, what about two consenting gay brothers? No birth defects there. If you don’t think it will happen, then google the article that was in Details Magazine entitled:

"The curious case of gay-porn-star identical twins"

It’s up to the gay community to take leadership and set boundaries on what is not acceptable individual behaviour. They should know that brothers marrying is wrong. Why not come out and say it?. But somehow I think they would champion it as part of their cause.
References :

From what I understand all Gays really want is for them and their partner to be able to receive the same benefits afforded to married couples.

The Government aka State should not have a role in Church matters per Separation of Church and State!

First of all there is not a nation on earth that can force the Catholic Church or the Jewish Church to celebrate the Sacrament of Marriage between two people of the same sex. It just won’t happen.

However, the Government should pass legislation that would allow Gay couples to receive the same benefits afforded to married couples without using the word Marriage.

Call it a Civil Union or Domestic Partnership.

Civil Unions or Domestic Partnerships would be the answer for Gays and others in similar situations such as elderly brothers or sisters living together.

This issue would have been resolved by now if it were not for the word Marriage and that Gays are pressing the issue.

As it stands the issue is too valuable to Politicians not to resolve but to use for their individual political gains.
References :

Naturally enough of course, anyone looking at the evidence finds no statistically relevant link between homosexuality and paedophilia, any more than there’s evidence that legalising one thing inexorably leads to legalising another with a broader societal disapproval rating (after all, alcohol kills more than crack, coke and heroin combined each year, but there’s no particular impetus to legalise any of these last three drugs).

Personally, if we’re going to go down the "slippery slope" route, I think one has to ask what would actually be that wrong with, for example, legalised polygamy/polyandry. Plenty of consent available there. Incestuous relationships, like crack, coke and heroin, would probably be beyond the pale of public perception for the forseeable future because they run an increased risk of coercion. As such, there’s probably no danger that legalising gay marriage would lead to any such issue in their case. Animals of course are incapable of giving – or indeed witholding – consent, so they entail an entirely different class of relationship.

Ultimately, the answer is that some people believe that legalising gay marriage leads to XYZ because they simply think it’s wrong. The trick is to educate generations out of the prejudices they pick up at home (or, it has to be remembered, in their place of worship). Change will come as quickly as the masses demand it, and the will allows it, as it did in Roe V Wade.
References :

Alternate lifestyles? Where do you draw the line after you start down that slippery slope? Of course those who put out this ludicrous argument also want to start down the slippery slope of injecting religion into everything.

a matter of whose slippery slope we head down.

And they fail/refuse to acknowlege that as this society is more accepting of gays it it simultaneously becoming less tolerant of family violence.
References :