Weisberg:

What's driving the legalization of gay marriage is not so much the moral argument but the pressures from couples who want to sanctify their relationships, obtain legal benefits, and raise children in a stable environment.

A "stable" environment? That's what's being created when two people realize their dream to undergo a ritual (that would have them being sprinkled with fairy dust) in order for them each to be able to keep the word he's given to the other?

That's not my idea of the proper use of the word stable (and I don't want to guess at what such a use does to environment), no matter who employs it. In the case of marriage, it would represent society's desire to see at least one of every two oh-so-loving halves of a couple remaining free enough to sue hell out of the other one.

Stable is a weasel word.

Unless the child of a gay or lesbian couple is adopted, isn't such a child either artificial or at least an indication that one member of that couple is artificial (and not really a "gay" or "lesbian" parent)? Isn't one person's desire to create life just a wee bit more serious (if not more telling) than would be any announcement or declaration, made by two similar people, of what would be a joint decision to undergo being sprinkled with fairy dust?

What law says that two non-married people can't put their names to their child's birth certificate? The certificates to which society has too little access are not marriage certificates but birth certificates, and enough members of society have come to believe that all are benefitted by some people's having access to anything which enables them to prevent the breeding of any of their offspring with anyone who is of the wrong class of people.