Subject title should read like this:- "Why do liberals and gay rights activists say that gay marriage is similar to interracial marriage, when they are clearly not the same?"
Mainly because in both cases there is an attempt at muscling into personal rights out of social disconfort.
I personally see homosexual marriage as even more legitimate and necessary than interracial. While they are not worth keeping or defending, ethnical divides at least have some factual basis and history, and for the most part it could be argued that there are alternatives (albeit ones that should not be imposed on the people actually involved).
By contrast, denial of same sex marriage is simply an attempt at decreeing same sex relationships lesser than heterosexual ones.
(...)
Those who are party to gay marriage or interracial marriage have been depicted as "minorities" in their own right; because each group will detract from the social norm of straight marriage between people of the same ethnicity.
Which, of course, should be destroyed. I don't like being subtle when subtlety is harmful.
(...)
More importantly, one could say that they are not the same in a fundamental sense because interracial marriage is more acceptable to society than gay marriage. Whereas, a man and woman can always procreate via a natural process, gay people can only do so via deviant methods, such as artificial insemination or surrogacy (although straight couples who are unable to have children will use the same methods to procreate such people are in a small minority, and it doesn't detract from the fact such methods are still considered to be deviant or unnatural by society as a whole).
Yeah... that perception, too, must be allowed and encouraged to die off quickly. Calling same sex couples "deviant"... really?
Besides, it is not even factually accurate. Homosexuals have offspring fairly often, to everyone's benefit. I believe them to be on average better parents than heteros, even.
And that is before considering how misguided a yardstick for legitimacy the ability of reproducing is.
Not only is interracial marriage more acceptable to society than gay marriage, but same sex marriage is clearly inferior to heterosexual marriage, even between partners of different ethnic origin. Because minorities are different and not the same. Which implies that each minority group will occupy a different space in the social pecking order or social hierarchy; because Hispanic people are not the same as Black people, who're not the same as people of Asian descent.
Ex-cu-se meeee? I take it you were hurried and wrote on an impulse. You almost seem to believe racism is objectively justified.
(...)
Therefore, gay marriage is obviously inferior to straight marriage between men and women no matter what their ethnic background; because different minorities will occupy different space in the social pecking order, but it would do no justice to pretend that such difference do not exist.
"Obviously inferior", my "something".
What makes a marriage inferior to any other is its lack of ability to bring happiness and good quality of life to the people involved in it. On that front, same sex marriage is clearly on the high ground when compared to the typical random marriage.
And I will have to assume you have not noticed how unadvisable it is to even talk seriously of a social pecking order based on ethnicity.
