Hispanic Pundit makes some suggestions:
Religious people who believe that homosexuality is wrong, whose religion does not allow gay marriage, will be reduced to (the same level as) those members of today’s society that are for racism. Sure, they are allowed to speak publicly, they still have free speech rights after all, but like racists today, they will be rebuked by society, seen as a fringe group of individuals that are out of the mainstream, that don’t deserve to be heard. In short, members of the Catholic Church tomorrow will be seen as members of the KKK today.
I think those that believe homosexuality is wrong and that their beliefs should hinder the equality of a group of people in the United States will be seen as medieval and backwards as their beliefs are. I find it fascinating that he mentions ‘a fringe group of individuals that are out of the mainstream, that don’t deserve to be heard’ because that is precisely what the gay civil rights movement is all about.
He goes on to suggest that some supporters of gay marriage have alternate motives:
[T]heir primary motive behind [supporting] gay marriage is not because they care about gays, it is not because they want gays to be recognized publicly, it is primarily because of their dislike for religion. They know that by bringing in gay marriage, they are indirectly pushing out religious politicians from public discourse and thereby furthering their secular utopia.
This really ignores the huge majority of gay men and women that are deeply religious and spiritual people. Take all the gay men, women and families out of the Catholic Church: it will collapse. How about not letting religious views of others interfere with me seeing my husband if he gets sick in the hospital? How about not letting religious views of others interfere with me getting a loan, employment, adoption…? I don’t know of anyone that really wants a secular utopia (unless we’re talking about consitutionally mandated separation of church and state) – we just want to be able to protect our families, relationships and property – y’know: the original basis for the social construct of marriage.
It really is that simple.
He also quotes a Weekly Standard article where Stanley Kurtz cherrypicks data from a study put out by the Council on Contemporary Families and Institute for Gay and Lesbian Strategic Studies. Kurtz bends the data to suggest the supposed damaging effects of gay marriage in the Netherlands. Actually the report says: (full report in PDF format – this is from page 7)
There is no evidence that giving partnership rights to same-sex couples had any impact on heterosexual marriage in Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands. Marriage rates, divorce rates, and non-marital birth rates have been changing in Scandinavia, Europe and the United States for the past thirty years. But those changes have occurred in all countries, regardless of whether or not they adopted same-sex partnership laws, and these trends were underway well before the passage of laws that gave same-sex couples rights.
And to combat Kurtz’s scare tactics the report actually says: (page 2)
Non-marital birth rates have not risen faster in Scandinavia or the Netherlands since the passage of partnership laws.
And to ice the cake: (page 7)
Giving same-sex couples marriage or marriage-like rights has not undermined heterosexual marriage in Europe, and it is not likely to do so in the United States.
What other facts and data are anti-marriage rights folks touting lately?