WHY DID PEOPLE RESIST GAY MARRIAGE? I think people fought against homosexuality

WHY DID PEOPLE RESIST GAY MARRIAGE?

I think people fought against homosexuality for the following reasons:

(a) marriage in public prohibits interference which causes high rates of male violence, often resulting in death, the consequences of which export vast cascading costs onto the polity – trust being one of the most important.

(b) marriage in public asks warranty of non-interference in the marriage and family as a means of preventing the moral hazard of the public carrying the cost of broken families.

(c) Homosexuality invokes a disgust response in many (very many) people, not the least of which because we do not want to increase ‘marginal cases’.

(d) homosexuality is of negative evolutionary, familial, value other than labor, and so why does the public need to insure it by means of marriage?

(e) Without offspring they could signal hyperconsumption more easily, and with two incomes they could signal hyperconsumption more easily

(f) homosexuals by hyperconsumption, sexual signaling, promiscuity, have demonstrated precisely the public behaviors that we have spent thousands of years removing from the public – precisely so that we could limit risk of violating the marriage and family as means of limiting the export of costs.

(g) It certainly appears that given all of us contain masculine and feminine traits, and that while in-utero homosexuality is merely a birth defect, various forms of mental illness can result from developmental issues such as bulimia, anorexia, sexual identity, issues. In other words, ‘gender preference’ appears to be, like anorexia and bulimia, a developmental disorder easily corrected by constant exposure to norms. (and therefore without loss of genetic persistence,)

(h) Genetically (and economically) non-reproducing people who are capable of productivity and self financing of reproduction are dead weight on civilization.

So externalities are the cause of marriage. homoxexuality does not require the institution of marriage: a corporation for the pooling of assets by which intergenerational reproduction, ‘financing’ and ‘insurance’ are provided.

Instead homoseuality requires only the formation of a partnership, and universal power of attorney. This is the only legal content of the marriage.

The question remains whether homosexuals can produced offspring in equal or not worse quality to hterosexuals and the money is against them. Not because some cannot. But because there are too many who cannot.

So we are running an experiment. I have no idea how it will play out.