Jonah, I would argue you don’t have to be bearing a gun or carrying a grenade to be a threat to an IDEA or to a culture. I don’t think he is trying to say these threats are identical. The best Prager paragraphs are these:
With same-sex marriage, our society declares by law that mothers are unnecessary, since two men are equally ideal as mothers and as the creators of a family; and that fathers are unnecessary, since two women are equally ideal as parents and as the creators of a family.
With same-sex marriage, our society declares that there is nothing special or even necessarily desirable about a man and a woman bonding. What is sacred to the proponents of same-sex marriage is the number of people marrying (two, for the time being), not that a man and woman bond.
With same-sex marriage, when taught in school about sex, marriage and family, children will have to be taught that male-male and female-female sex, love and marriage are identical to male-female sex, love and marriage. And when asked, “Who do you think you will marry when you grow up?” thanks to the ubiquitous images of media, far more children will consider members of the same sex.
With same-sex marriage, no adoption agency will ever be able to prefer a married man and woman as prospective parents. Aside from the tragedy of denying untold numbers of children a mother and a father, this will lead to a drastic diminution in women placing children for adoption, since most of these women will prefer something that will then be illegal — that agencies place her child with a man and woman, not with two men or two women.
With same-sex marriage, any media — films, advertisements, greeting cards — that only depict married couples as a woman and a man will be considered discriminatory and probably be sued.
With same-sex marriage, those religious groups that only marry men and women will be deemed beyond the pale, marginalized and ostracized.