LA Times had a decent article on how some objections to gay marriage aren't just coming from hate-filled fundamentalists.
http://www.latimes.com/features/lifestyle/la-et-rivenburg12mar12,1,7976228.story?coll=la-home-style
the argument that gay marriage leads the way to polygamy, etc. i always thought was stupid. don't gay people just want the same rights as monogamous heterosexuals? but then they quote some law professor who said the goal WAS to overturn monogomy, which i found rather disturbing....
Paula Ettelbrick, a law professor who runs the International Gay & Lesbian Human Rights Commission, recommends legalizing a wide variety of marriage alternatives, including polyamory, or group wedlock. An example could include a lesbian couple living with a sperm-donor father, or a network of men and women who share sexual relations.
One aim, she says, is to break the stranglehold that married heterosexual couples have on health benefits and legal rights. The other goal is to "push the parameters of sex, sexuality and family, and in the process transform the very fabric of society."
um,i really hope this gal is just a kook and not representative of the opinions of most folks supporting gay marriage. If this really is the agenda of a lot of folks, then i can understand why folks are so adamantly opposed to gay marriage.