The attempt to redefine marriage other than between one man and one woman is indecent and wrong. The hollow philosophy surrounding the movement is self-serving and self-refuting. This philosophy is called Relativism.
Proponents of same-sex marriages are advocating that marriage is merely a social construction; therefore, whatever definition of marriage society condones approves the practice. Clearly, if one day society decides that marriage between two brothers, two sisters, a mother and a son or a father and a son is acceptable, then that will be the new normative behavior. There is definitely something wrong with this outlook.
For instance, there would be no difference between a heterosexual monogamous couple with four children avowed to a traditional religious affiliation of any faith, to a marital union between two men and four of their adult children who earn a living producing pornographic films of their sexual encounters. The moral divide between these lifestyles is intuitive.
The grayness of moral relativity in our society is self-serving. Whenever there is no overarching standard of morality people live for themselves and gratify their evil desires. Moral integrity is about living by principle and not by feeling or ambiguity. I am entertained when relativists participate in moral discussion when they shouldn't have any morals to discuss.
Anytime a relativist speaks about morality it is self-refuting. Making a statement about moral standards acknowledges there is a standard of morality. Those who embrace moral relativity should think before they speak, or rather, keep silent. Ultimately, relativists in support of same-sex marriages are advocating marital and familial lawlessness for the destruction of the state, the family and our souls.