Originally posted by Jabriol
I can't figure out their rhetoric. How does allowing gays to marry damage marriage between heterosexual couples? I can understand if they feel that homosexuality is sinful and that the government should not respect a sinful coupling. I completely disagree, but it's consistent at least. I just can't see any connection between what they say they're protecting, which is heterosexual marriage, and what they're fighting against, homosexual marriage. Do they think that because the option to marry another person of the same sex exists, people will not get married to someone of the opposite sex? Maybe in a vanishingly small number of cases but not to any significant degree.
I think the reality is what you describe:

"they feel that homosexuality is sinful and that the government should not respect a sinful coupling"

However, conservatives want to avoid getting into a religious debate. They have been very careful over the last few years to cultivate what Bush calls "Compassionate conservatism" and what he has touched on even in his most recent comments that the marriage debate should be compassionate and tolerant of all people. Given that they have hamstrung themselves so severely, they really cannot come right out and SAY that this is about a sincerely held belief that homosexuals are sinful. In fact, I think a lot of conservatives sincerely do feel that tolerance of homosexuality, no matter how they feel about it personally, is a moral imperative (Christian Tolerance and all that, you know).

So, they have to use the usual code phrases for attacks on gays, women's rights, single parents, etc. I'm not saying that people who express concern about family values and the santity of the tradition nuclear family are ALWAYS using such terms as cover for gay bashing and anti-feminism, but couching the debate this way is a very effective way for conservatives to avoid coming off as intolerant or as violating the seperation between church and state.