The questions in my mind are these:
Why do we need legislation that would give those who choose to engage in a particular sexual activity special rights?
We're not. The 14th Amendment of he Constitution asserts that every American has the right to equal treatment under the law:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
That is the only right under consideration. Marriage is a legal privilege, not a right.
Where will it go next? What happens when brothers/sisters, fathers/daughters, mothers/sons want special rights to marry because they are "consenting adults and are deeply in love with one another"?
Slippery-slope argument. Do 50% of Americans support the privilege of incestuous marriage? No.
Will the adultery "minority" insist upon legalized polygomy?
I personally think that if people want to engage in polyamory, it's none of my business.
Not everyone who is opposed to this is a christian.
The vast majority are.
Some are very concerned about "minorities" being recognized/redefined as a group with a particular sexual preference.
I've never heard of this. Can you link to a reputable source? I'd like to read what they're about.
Will necrophiliacs and pedophiles also become minorities and be granted special rights?
1) As noted above, no one is pushing for "special rights"; the right to equal treatment under the law already exists.
2) Neither dead folk nor minors have legal standing to enter into contracts (which is what marriage is, legally), so this concern of yours is nugatory. Neither can give legal consent.
Can we deny them special rights just because their preferences are illegal when certain homosexual practices are also still illegal in some countries/states?
See above, regarding legal consent, for your answer to this, too.
What happens then to those who are TRULY minorities? Do they get lost in the shuffle?
Are you arguing that gay people aren't truly a minority?
Perhaps the threat you are referring to is not actually about a particular group of people, but rather society as a whole.
I don't see how permitting gay marriage between consenting adults threatens anyone.
It's not really a denial of equal treatment under the law. Anyone that chooses to enter into a marriage with a member of the opposite sex is accorded certain benefits by the government. Homosexuals have just as much of a right to do that or not do that as I do.
A Hobson's Choice is not equal treatment. You are asking one person to act against their very nature.
Let me ask you this: did you choose to be heterosexual? Could you decide to enter into a gay relationship?
Do you think it's safe to assume that you are unique in feeling that your sexuality is an innate part of you?
Just because they may not be attracted to the opposite sex does not mean that the law needs to be tailored to support them. It'd be like me demanding maternity leave and when I'm denied it I claim that the government is not giving me equal treatment under the law.
1) The 14th Amendment is existing law. The only thing being demanded is its application to all citizens. That seems fair to me. No one is "tailoring" anything, except insofar as laws have to be passed to force the states to enforce laws that have already been adopted (the 14th Amendment).
2) The comparison to maternity leave is inapt because while not all humans have a uterus, all humans have loving relationships. So long as the government recognizes romantic unions, the 14th Amendment requires that it recognize them without regard to biological considerations like the race or gender of the participants.
However, for most homosexuals, gay marriage is not about equal rights. It's about using the government to force others to accept something that their religion teaches is morally unacceptable. In doing so, the homosexual sexual agenda is pressuring the government to violate the first amendment right to freedom of religion for many Americans regardless of what religion they believe. This is why Gay Marriages must never be allowed which is why Civil Unions are the only way that homosexuals will get equal rights without violating the rights of others.
I would vote against any such requirement myself. A church is a private organization and entitled to sanctify or refuse to sanctify relationships as it sees fit.
