From: Westbrick | #148
They aren't offended because, even if the motivations are not religious, the results abide by religious doctrine. As a comparison, think of murder: why does the state prevent people from killing one another? Presumably to maximize utility, or protect individual rights, or something similar. The religious person chooses not to kill because it is one of God's commandments. Yet they will still be content with the state's motivation, because the result conforms to the moral order.
I get your comparison but 'murder' is a bit of an extreme example. The difference here is that murder is something that has a potential to affect the life of a Christian - they could be the one being murdered, after all. Gay marriage is different. It's a lifestyle choice that someone else is making, one that doesn't have any direct bearing on the Christian since they don't necessarily have to associate with it. It could be morally reprehensible to them, but so are a bunch of other things in society that they have to deal with (such as the existence of other belief systems).
They have every right to be offended but none to tell other people how to live their lives. If this leads to religous outcry, the government dropping the term "marriage" in favor of "civil union," then so be it, but it has to apply to all "legal marriages" for the sake of equality.
But then maybe the people in male-female secular civil unions would get offended and here we go again.
--
You have no time to ponder such questions, as Link has just grabbed a Smash Ball.
http://backloggery.com/herodeltiempo/sig.gif