The bottom line is this: the word “marriage” describes the physical, emotional, mental, legal and even spiritual union of a man and a woman, period, dot and exclamation point. There’s no gray area, no ‘fuzzy terminology’ and no room for interpretation.

Some gays, lesbians and activists, however, feel we should redefine both the word and the legal concept to include same-sex partnerships. They’re holding rallies, launching PR campaigns, sponsoring letter writing campaigns and starting up grass-roots efforts to change the definition from “a man and a woman” to “a spouse and a spouse”.

While I must give them credit for trying to change the world, I do hope they’ll realize soon that they’re up against an immovable brick wall; it simply will not happen. I, along with 55% of the responders in a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll, think that so-called “gay marriages” should not be legal.

Marriage is the foundation of our society. It has been around for thousands upon thousands of years. Redefining marriage as proposed, from “one man and one woman” to “a spouse and a spouse”, opens up Pandora’s Box.

Who defines spouse? What is the definition? Is a spouse in New York the same as a spouse in California? I hate the cliché of the slippery slope but in this case I’ll make an exception and use it.

What is a spouse? A man, a woman, a child, a dog, a cow, a house? Who qualifies as a ‘spouse’? Cousins, siblings, fathers, daughters, mothers, sons? It sounds ridiculous, but if we allow marriage to be opened up and changed subjectively we’re placing ourselves in danger of losing the very basis for our society.

Those fighting for the right to marry really need to shift their focus from trying to change constitutions and existing laws to introducing legislation aimed at legalizing gay civil unions. I personally would have no problem giving homosexual couples certain limited rights with a civil union. No matter what our religious and social objections may be I think we need to recognize the commitment and “contract” that gay couples are willing to make.

I will admit I’m in the minority on this, though. While the ABC News/Washington Post poll showed that 55% of Americans are against gay “marriage”, it also showed that 51% of Americans are opposed to gay civil unions. Only 46% of us think such unions wouldn’t be a bad thing.

The problem I have with this issue is the absolutely ridiculous arguments being used to argue for gay marriage. Each and every time I hear the word “discrimination” used to describe the current definition of marriage I go through the roof!

If upholding the words of the constitution, the laws of the country, the laws of religion and the views of society is ‘discrimination’, then you’re absolutely right, we’re discriminating against you – deal with it. We’re all discriminated against. I myself am discriminated against each and every day!

I can’t go into a woman’s bathroom (sex discrimination), I don’t qualify for a senior citizen’s discount (age discrimination), I’m not allowed to be a Jewish cantor (religious discrimination), I don’t qualify for the various Affirmative Action programs (race discrimination), my application for store manager of a local shop in the Ukraine was denied (language discrimination), and the list goes on.

The constitution, legal system, religion and society say it’s wrong to rape a child. Using the ‘discrimination’ argument, should we amend the constitution and legal system to allow the rape of a child because without doing so we’re discriminating against child rapists, those that feel their opinions and lifestyles of child rape are due the same equal-rights protection as everyone else?

Likewise, murder is illegal but by enforcing the law are we discriminating against murderers? Are we’re denying their right to do what they wish and their equal-rights protections? Do we need to consider legalizing murder?

Let’s take a look at some of the biggest discriminatory laws; murder, rape, battery, theft and abuse. Each discriminates against those that wish to do those things, those that deserve equal protection and equal rights.

The bottom line is this: we discriminate against every single person in the country and even the world. It must be done for the sake of everyone else. Everybody cannot be allowed to do absolutely anything he or she wishes; to do so would be hell on Earth.

Since the dawn of time we’ve relied on the greater sense of what’s right and what’s wrong to guide our behaviors. Society as a whole, using that sense, has developed sets of rules that we must follow. The legal system has put those rules into laws, ensuring compliance by punishing those that disobey.

To change marriage to include gays and lesbians we’d need to start at the beginning; we’d need to change the sense of right and wrong ingrained in our heads by religion and nature for thousands of years. We’d need to change the foundation of religion and society and finally we’d need to change the law. I hate to break it to all of you, but that just won’t happen! Far too many Americans feel that the legal, societal and religious status of “marriage” should be reserved for one man and one woman.

My question to all those vehemently supporting gay marriage is this: what is the purpose of this new movement? Is it an attempt to create some sort of legal same-sex union or is it an attempt to forcefully change the foundation of our society in order to force-feed the acceptance of homosexuality to the country?

If your intent is to “rile up the masses” and promote a homosexual cause, forget it! The sanctity of marriage is not the proper vehicle to do this. Choose something else.

If the intent is solely to provide legal rights to a same-sex couple, then my advice is to approach the issue from that end. Instead of trying to change the world, just add to it – become ‘civil union’ activists and pour your hearts, soul, energy and money into creating a marriage-like status for gay and lesbian couples.