Hasbeen! go out in the garden mate, get some fresh air.
No one takes much notice of grumpy old men.

Hasbeen, the desire to eat is probably secondary to love, hate and the need for human contact if Harlows monkey study is anything to go by.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrNBEhzjg8I

Csteele, that's not really the point, bans on one or the other type of relationship were mostly ineffectual, the sheer number of mixed race people getting about gives lie to the idea that anti miscgenation laws had any real effect and "gay" marriage isn't "banned", it simply doesn't exist.
Look at it another way, "Gay" marriage is a technological step, it's painted as a moral or ethical proposition, but it isn't, it's a wholly scientific venture.
The invention of the atomic bomb or the advanced scientific methods employed in firebombing German cities can be seen in the same context, it's a scientific resolution to a problem which is sold as a humane solution and a necessary evil, in both cases to "end the war" more quickly.
We all know that "Gay" marriage will lead to controversial scientific methods being employed to solve their fertility issues and will be spun so as to inform the other 99% of the moral and ethical necessity for practice of this new form of Eugenics.
Were the scientific steps which led to the atomic bomb being deployed a step forward for humanity?
Do you think the current leaps in Eugenic technology being deployed in China, such as the research they're doing into heritability of intelligence and other traits are progressive?
Wealthy Western Homosexuals (and to be fair heterosexuals) have thus far shown no squeamishness about taking advantage of the reproductive options available in the third world and the pragmatic attitudes of it's scientists, if they are able to access cloning or to design the genome of their child they most certainly will.
Is this progress?

Saltpetre

"Government is the great fiction by which everyone tries to live at everyone else's expense."
Bastiat

Underlying your post is the idea that mere violence of itself creates social benefits, and is in fact, a higher form of sociality. It's not. It's easy to disprove your theory. Would killing be justified in order to achieve these alleged benefits of government?

All you're proving is that you believe the fiction and have never thought through the issues.

csteele
You are mistaken if you think gay marriage is illegal.

Should all different forms of sexual relationship have an equal right to governmental recognition, and if not why not?

Why should government be registering people's sexual relationships in the first place?

JKJ,

Do I need to point out that a system "..by which everyone tries to live at everyone else's expense" is merely a fictional fabrication? (Though SOME may indeed try their best to make it a reality - at least for themselves - and to hell with the rest!)

If this is how you see Government it is no wonder no-one on this Forum (or anyone else with half a brain) can take your ideas seriously.