Let's take a moment to look closely at the flaws in this argument against gay marriage.  The first one is the belief that the purpose of marriage is to produce offspring. The problem with this argument is that some marriages produce offspring, and some don't. Also, offspring is produced as easily outside of the institution of marriage as it is produced inside it. If marriage were abolished tomorrow, the human race would continue, and every child born would be born out of wedlock. If the definition of marriage was the union of a man and a woman who then must produce offspring, any marriage between infertile people would be invalid. The next logical step would then be, marriage is to promote the rearing of children. Well and good, but are you going to take away all of the children who were born out of wedlock? Single parent no more, you must either, get married or forfeit your child. What is it about this, “marriage regulates people's sexual behavior and thus gays can't get married.” That's not even a valid reason. You'd think that, if you didn't want gay people to have the sex you don't like so much but can't really prevent, (and keep them from spreading STDs around), you'd at least want to get some more control over it. How do heterosexuals keep their sexual partners from sleeping all over the place and getting STDs? They get married. I'm not really going to delve into the whole “homosexuality is immoral argument.” While related, no one on this forum has really presented an argument worth refuting.