The Catholic Church – in these modern times, being as it is, ever able to step straight into whatever dogshit has been laid before it and which everyone else looking on can see clearly – has hit out against “gay marriage”.
I, having been married to two women (and not both at once, plus having had various girlfriends in the interval) feel slightly unqualified on this ground: but to compare it to compare “gay marriage” (an oxymoron I’ll freely admit) to slavery or abortion invites ridicule, and also more assaults from those StaliNazis who’d get rid of “proper” religions (Muslims! Hear me! When they’ve finished with us Christians, you’re all, all of you, next for the cattle-trucks to Belsen! I’m not joking! really!) to replace these with their bloodthirsty, pre-capitalist barbarian Gaian unpleasantnesses.
The only problem about marriage is that states have muscled in in the last 2-300 years, probably to use it as a sort of tax-farming scam by causing the property of more people than merely the Upper-Classes to fall into the taxable-description-net. In Banks, say, in er, say, 1800, I don’t think anybody would have given a stuff about which male 14-year-old decided to shack up in a new (or old) hut or in a corner beyond the animals in either folks’ hut, with which female teen from up the pig-track thataway. They probably didn’t even know exactly how old either one was anyway. These people had nothing much in the way of goods, certainly nothing worth taxing except perhaps a boat and some string and a small patch of thatch-rushes (for the hut.)
“Gay” marriage might have bothered them, for the objective was to make as many babies as possible quickly while the female-teen was shaggable, simply to have enough hands to manage what passed for the harvest every late-August if they were lucky, and if the ice didn’t come, and if half of them hadn’t died before age 8.
I don’t think “gay” marriage bothers libertarians much: so long as the “married gays” don’t bother others by trying to get money off Christians by pretending to want to stay in their hotels where the owners don’t want them, for their own reasons. If people want to “be gay”, it’s their choice. They can even be “glad to be gay”: it’s no skin off my nose. Slavery is probably worse though, than “being glad to be gay”. I note that this churchman who was sounding off has not said anything about who is running slavery today, and where. I may have more to say later.