The problem arises because all things that feel good are not in fact good for us under all circumstances. If someone is struggling to lose weight even though eating that bowl of ice cream feels good it's not really what they want even though that bowl of ice cream would be great once they've gotten below their weight target. Morphine is wonderful if you've just had a traumatic injury but it's horrible if used just to make someone feel great.
While the modern culture declares that sex is always good for us the reality is that sex, like morphine, is something that one has to be selective about.
Modern society compartmentalizes life so that the culture can simultaneously declare that casual sex is fine while wondering why STDs, unwanted pregnancies, and the feminization of poverty occur.
The simple truth is that sex for fun's sake leads to all sorts of major problems for those who buy into that philosophy as well as for society.
Let's look at the hook up culture that is becoming more prevalent in colleges. Boy meets girl they have sex. Society tells us so what they're consenting adults so it's fine. But the reality is that the boy and the girl are setting themselves up for a world of hurt.
Just having sex can create major problems. If the two have no feelings for each other then that means that they're learning to treat other people as objects to be used not as people to be loved. If one has feelings and the other doesn't then that leads to all sorts of emotional issues. Then of course there's the whole STD thing; our culture says it's ok to not tell your partner about an incurable STD so long as you're fairly sure that you can't transmit it on the day you hook up.
Worst case the girl gets pregnant--ABC is not perfect and condoms are much worse--then what? Well the most likely best case scenario is the girl has the baby and the baby is adopted. The boy and the girl getting married and providing the family their daughter deserves is unlikely since the boy and the girl were brought together by lust not love. A very common scenario is that the boy tells the girl it's her problem and the girl is urged to kill her daughter. Contrary to the culture an abortion does not make a woman a non-mother it just makes her the mother of a dead child.
For some bizarre reason the culture can simultaneously declare that when a woman has a miscarriage or when her child dies in a car accident we should all be insanely sympathetic while telling us that if a woman voluntarily kills her own daughter that woman will suffer no trauma. Many studies have shown that abortion can lead to significant emotional and psychological damage. This should be obvious. The culture acknowledges the trauma a cop faces when he is forced to shoot a mass murdering serial killer because people, at least sane ones, don't like to kill even in self defense. Yet that same culture thinks that a woman killing her daughter will have no consequences.
Anyone who understands the relationship between a woman and her children, anyone who has seen a woman rubbing her tummy when she's pregnant knows how strong the bond is between a mother and her child. This is not shocking if you believe in the Bible but even if you're a hard core atheists the simple fact that woman have been formed by 4 billion years of evolution to make babies would make it clear that when a woman kills her baby she's going against her deepest biological instincts; that's why mothers will die protecting their children.
What then does marriage have to do with this? The answer is simple a marriage where a man and a woman commit to each other is the ideal environment for having sex because it's the ideal environment for having children. Marriage exists to protect and foster our children not to guarantee our sexual happiness. In marriage a pregnancy is not a problem to be dealt with rather it's a blessing to be grateful for.
The introduction of ABC however allowed the culture to lie to us and declare that marriage wasn't about children but about adults because ABC can fool us into thinking that sex and babies are two unrelated things. The simple reality is that marriage exists so that we can have and raise children properly. Does that mean that infertile people can't marry? No since you never really know if a couple will have kids but it does mean that the idea of marrying with the intent to not have children is a violation of what marriage is really all about. Prior to ABC people agreed that you got married to have a family.
While it is true that if a man and a woman are going to have sex doing so in a committed relationship, and by committed don't read shacking up until the guy wants to move on, is better that doesn't mean that marriage exists so that adults can have sex.
Look at divorce. When a man and a woman with children divorce they're saying that their happiness is more important than their kids; they're saying that adults first responsibility is to themselves. Oh sure the culture will say that it's better for kids if their parents divorce than if their parents are always fighting but that's a bunch of nonsense.
First if someone is in a job they can't afford to lose and they're having huge problems with a co-worker or their boss they will do whatever it takes to keep that job. How then can the culture say that parents job of raising their kids isn't so important that the parents have to make it work? Second we all know that children are constantly hoping their parents will get back together which is a strong indication that kids really don't like their parents abandoning them. Third divorce often means poverty for the mother and the children; hardly a good thing for the kids.
But once the culture says that marriage is about the adults not about having children then it's easy to see why divorce should be easy. If marriage is about sex and sex is about having fun then once marriage stops being fun the culture declares that we should abandon it and move on.
That's why so many in the culture support same sex marriage. If marriage is just about sex and the adults and not about raising children then any number of entities, not just people, can get "married". All a same sex "marriage" is is two people saying that their sexual relationship is a little different. In Holland where gay marriage has been legal they've found that gay marriages are very short lived and that the "couples" are rarely if ever faithful to each other. This makes sense since lust unlike love is not long lasting or faithful.
The problem with legalizing same sex marriage is that it makes it official that marriage is not about the children but about the adults, thereby encouraging all sorts of hurt for the children.
Children are our greatest blessing and they need, just as we needed, two loving parents who are of different genders in order to grow up and be all they can be. Two men cannot provide what a mother can no matter how much they love a child and two women can't provide what a father can no matter how much they love a child. Single parents, no matter how hard they try, can't be as good as a mother and a father. That doesn't mean that single parents are bad or that gays are bad it just means that because men and woman are different neither gender can do all of what both genders together can.
Opposing same sex marriage has nothing to do with dissing homosexuals. It's all about what's best for the children. Homosexuals can love children but they can't provide what those children need.
If our society accepts the historically unprecedented position that marriage is just about two adults establishing some sort of long term sexual relationship with kids being an option then children will suffer and society will decay; without children there is no future but children require huge investments of parents lives and of parents treasure and in a society where adults are told that the purpose in life is fun not children fewer and fewer adults will make the sacrifices to ensure that the society has a future.