You mean why join a religion that is against you. I agree. People want to do it nevertheless - as much a mystery to me as it is to you. But then, we have Log Cabin (gay) Republicans on the Christian side.
Do you think your religion is the reason? You're a nice guy who wants to avoid confrontation and be friendly to all. You couldn't be that without a religion? I'm happy and have a stable life as well without religion.
Do they know that you worship a god that finds them unacceptable (by their definition, not yours, which is probably that your god loves and accepts everybody)? If they do, they respect you less for it and don't believe that you will ever accept them whatever you say. If they don't, their opinion of you will change if they do.
You are being to examine your beliefs. Here's Buddha on examining beliefs:
"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conductive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it." - Buddha
Was that bullying, too? Incidentally, that guy would have made a great humanist. He enshrined both reason and utilitarian ethics in that statement.
I'm with the others. I generally don't read such citations. I'm sorry if this seems disrespectful, but they read like Hallmarks - breezy exhortative language with no substance or insight. I doubt I'll ever be quoting Bahaullah as a source of wisdom or insight like I just did Buddha. Why? Because it reads as fluff to me.
Nor do I assume that the adherents citing them understand them as I would. Likewise with orphan links intended to substitute for an argument. If the poster can't or won't paraphrase the same argument himself in a few words, then he probably doesn't really understand it, and when the link is refuted, you often get, "That's not the part I meant" or "That's not what it said to me."
You may believe that, but you'd do well to understand how it reads to others.
Where's the discipline part? As I've noted already, this god is indistinguishable from nonexistent. All I see are human beings chastising other human beings in the name of an absentee deity.
You don't also believe that. You believe that exclusively, or only allow for a limited number of alternatives such as living alone or with parents or roommates. Other kinds of families are not acceptable
Equality is not equity. Sure, you equally grant to all the right to all to marry the opposite sex and have and raise children.