Homosexual marriage rubs some people wrong because its a question of morality, and morals are subjective.
IMO, turning morality into law in cases where it can't be easily demonstrated that it directly and very noticeably affects the life, liberty, and happiness of their peers is wrong. Two big bearded hairy guys making out grosses me out (although the girls tend to have the opposite effect), but that is certainly not directly impacting my life, liberty, and happiness to the extent that it needs to be banned by law.
HOWEVER, they are still hypocrites then if polygamists want their marriage recognized but are still banned as being immoral, as its the exact same issue.
And some have argued that the marriage has laws surrounding it as an institution primarily as the standard mold for which children are raised for the next generation. Certainly this logic works for polygamists better than it does sterile homosexual couples.
So the sensible solution IMO is to completely do away with marriage from government endorsement, and have the government only recognize voluntary unions of any type, for joined household tax purposes and visitation rights and the like. The romance is in the ceremony after all, not in some cold disinterested government office to pick up a sheet of paper. And certainly a polygamist wife is entitled to see her husband in the hospital as much as a lesbian is to see her exclusive lover she considers a spouse. And the great thing about this is that it no longer mixes the fact that "marriage" is a religious ceremony and that government by its endorsement also equals an endorsement by the people, and people as individuals have the right not to support gay marriage or polygamy or whatever else... they just don't have a right to ban it IMO. So its the only real fair solution for all IMO.
that there'll be a domino effect!
