OK. Let me further explain my original process:
I use the biological attributes of human sexual behavior to then frame the "moral" issue of same gender marriage. Since "right" and "wrong" are highly subjective, I was attempting to mitigate those variables through the use of "primary bio-function" of sexual activity.
If the reproductive organs are for, well, reproduction, then any behavior that impedes it is deviance. Homosexual relationships are in direct contravention to human reproduction. Period. It is impossible for two same gender humans to reproduce (although technology has allowed us to bypass this, it still is deviating from the "intended" system design). So, we can use this as a basis for the moral implications of said behavior. Should a homosexual relationship be allowed to adopt children (a civil issue)? You are choosing to not engage in sexual behavior that facilitates reproduction! This is a consequence of deviance. But now we are saying, well, some hetero couples cannot have children (due to a system malfunction, not a behavioral choice, impetus, or whatever), so it should be okay for anyone to get a kid (even sexual deviants).
So now we have to determine which sexual deviants can and should be allowed to have children.
In other words, the sexual deviance leads to moral issues which lead to civil issues, etc, etc.
I feel that the focus of this issue has been backwards: were addressing civil issues, by arguing about it's morals, without looking at the root of the issue: it is not normal (from a design standpoint, not from a popularity standpoint) for a person to be sexually attracted to someone of the same gender. This is sexual deviance. Aside from hermaphrodites, this is a psychological issue (in the brain). I believe we do not fully understand why it occurs. But today, we're not even trying to. Which I find has been having a cascading effect into the moral and civil issues.
----------
You pee when you have orgasms? Time to see a doctor...
Well said!
----------
Indeed, and gay couples are going to have gay sex whether or not they can get gay married, so why not just let them get married and give them all of the legal and financial benefits of marriage?
Why give them legal and financial benefits?
Id be for letting them get married by the state and have no benefits other than being declared married. That will decide what they REALLY want.