Yes, but that has nothing to do with my argument. The crux of my disagreement is the continued slump towards the belief that morality is whatever one defines it as.
Okay - what do you think morality is? And do you think gay marriage is immoral?
Did I say any of that or imply differently? Are you just highlighting portions of what I wrote without bothering to read it?
I quoted all of your post, but I broke it into parts to make it easier to respond to.
No, you didn't say that, but you said that family (mother, father, child) is a cornerstone of "social security." What was your reason for saying that? Does it have anything to do with gay marriage? I am assuming it does since you posted it on a gay marriage thread.
Where in California?s constitution does it address the right to marry? Or same-sex marriages in general? Or the state?s right to direct the nature of language?
I believe it was the idea of "separate but equal." I explained this before. The "unions" in California had all of the rights of traditional marriage, but were called something different. That was what was found unconstitutional.
Don't ask me about marriage in the constitution - the civil unions were voted in by a majority. All that changed was the word marriage.
only to have them stand up and turn around and it's a guy! 
Foul!
