If someone, even legal authorities, says same-sex marriage is marriage, it doesn't make it marriage, it only means that person or authority says and believes it to be marriage.
And so does the happy couple, and their family, and their friends, and their employers or employees, and so on.
Your declarations by fiat that SSM is not marriage have no force whatsoever.
Please explain why marriage has not always been traditionally defined as a covenant between a man and a woman.
Let's start with a long history of polyamorous relationships and marriages.
Let's continue with an understanding that marriage has significantly different meaning today than it did just 150 years ago. The modern "love marriage" really picked up steam in the early 1900s; prior to that, marriages were arranged by parents, mostly to secure socioeconomic positioning in the community.
Marriage rules were also much more relaxed at various points in time. E.g. in Heian-era Japan, a noble man would "marry" a woman by sleeping with her 2 or 3 nights in a row, then having a ceremony with her parents that involved tea and moon cakes. The bonds were rather loose, as husbands often had more than one wife, and wives occasionally packed up and went back to their parents when things really got bad (e.g. a younger rival gained too much influence in a household).
Same-sex "marriage" doesn't deny the differences between man and women, it denies the idea that they find complementarity in marriage. Please read more carefully.
SSM has nothing to do with any such claims, nor is it required to do so. It's a culmination of the idea of the love marriage. Two consenting adults who want to spend their life together, and have their commitment recognized by the community, can apply whatever standards they choose.
There are exceptions to some rules (bear in mind: not to all rules). Evidence shows clearly children are best off with a mother and a father, particularly if that mother and father are their natural parents.
No, there is no such evidence. There are unsubstantiated claims, but not real proof.
Why is my statement that there's no such thing as a family in same-sex marriage "completely untrue"?
Because it's screamingly obvious that it's not true.
A family is simply a small group of individuals, related to each other in various ways -- by birth, by marriage, by adoption, sometimes by association. There is no requirement whatsoever that the group must be anchored around a heterosexual couple. E.g. if a couple has 2 kids, and the husband dies, chances are pretty good his parents will still consider the mother and kids as part of their family.
I have nothing against using artificial means to have a child. But while artificial means is only required for some heterosexual couples, it is required 100 percent of the time for homosexuals....
lol
No, not even close.
Lesbians can still choose to have sex with men, and gay men can still choose to have sex with women. Homosexuals can certainly conceive children via the standard apparatus. Preference ≠ Requirement.
Further, there is nothing wrong with straight or gay couples or single women choosing to use artificial insemination or other techniques.
SS"M" is between two consenting adults, but that in and of itself makes it neither marriage nor even a naturally right thing to do.
"Natural?" lol
Marriage is not a natural state. Neither is monogamy. They're social conventions.
Homosexuality is natural. It occurs all the time in nature.
If everyone became homosexuals, the human race would go utterly extinct within a hundred years.
lol
1) There is no chance of the entire human population becoming gay
2) Even if it did, gay people can still conceive children, including using standard biological methods
You know deep down I have made a rational and logical argument with many convincing points showing why same-sex marriage is wrong....
Not in the post above. You haven't provided a single argument why it is unethical for two consenting adults who happen to be of the same gender to get married.
• SSM harms no one
• SSM doesn't alter heterosexual relationships
• Gay couples can successfully raise happy and healthy kids
• Marriage is not "natural," nor was it ever, nor does it need to be
• The survival of the human race is not threatened by SSM
You just don't like it, and that's not enough to justify any sort of moral judgment.