"Jesus would rather kill, not marry, gay people" - Franklin Graham

[Ravenshire]

Well - there's no concrete proof that your god even exists so, really, your entire argument is moot. 

An individual should not be told they are going to hell or that they are sinners simply for who they fall in love with or are attracted to. The real problem is that homophobic white men decided a long time ago that something natural and beautiful, grossed them out and so they decided that it "must" be a bad thing because it didn't fit in with their narratives of what "normal" love should be. 

Fuck that noise. What other people decided to do behind closed doors is none of anyone else's business. Plain and simple. If you don't like gay marriage, don't have one. If you don't like gay sex, don't participate in it. No one is holding a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to be in a gay relationship. So if they aren't hurting christians, then christians need to mind their own fucking business.

Thank you for the very clear examples of mischaracterizations, red herrings, and straw men arguments that you beat up on.  If you are incapable or don't care to even understand the other side, this automatically makes you ineligible to be part of the conversation. You are just unproductive/destructive noise. This is what is wrong in society today!

No one is trying to stop people from doing anything behind closed doors. The current issue is the redefinition of marriage. Given the belief structure of Christians (God ordained the relationship right from the beginning and everything that follows), you really can't see why they (as a group) have a problem with redefining the word 'marriage'? You could just disagree with this point, but no, that won't do. You want to characterize it as Christians trying to control what's going on in the bedroom because that's a straw man you feel you have a strong argument against. Another disingenuous trick is to find extreme view and then label everyone else with that view.

You know, I've offered a possible solution to your conundrum on the definition of marriage a couple times already, and to my knowledge, not one of you christers has commented on it. You want "marriage" to be a sacred bond between one man and one woman? Fine. Why don't you spearhead the drive to make "marriage" a strictly religious thing and civil unions a strictly legal thing. Anyone who wants to get "married" can go to a church and do so. With the caveat that it has no legal strength whatsoever. If a couple wants to have that they would need to enter into the legally binding civil union. This way, everyone is treated equally and all can choose one, the other or both.

I'm betting you have no interest on stripping the church of those legal powers though.