Every one should know by now that if you do not support the legal recognition of same-sex marriage, then you richly deserve the ignominious title of "bigot". If you do not know this, then what is wrong with you? Have you been under a rock since 2004? Are you Amish (silly question--if you were Amish, then you could not be reading this unless you chose to spend your 'Rumspringa on the Satanic Internet, but even then I would think pent-up desire for Forbidden Fruit would hardly lead you to the dyspeptic ditherings of a pathetic and paunchy middle-aged lout)? Or are you so devoid of civic-mindedness, so trapped in your couch potato bubble of junk food and NASCAR that you could not be bothered to pay attention to The Civil Rights Issue of Our Time?
If this is so, then shame on you and let me bring you up to speed for you are clearly in desperate need of education. Back in 2004 it was still respectable to be against the legal recognition of same-sex marriage. But that was pretty much the last gasp of our petty childhood. Those were the days when the accusation of drinking a latte could irrevocably damage a Presidential Campaign, but since then the American Public has put away such childish things, and among other childish things we've put away is the notion that marriage can only be the union of a man and a woman.
It was argued again and again that marriage had to be such a union because only such a union could procreate. But, I repeat, that was a time long ago when drinking a latte could disqualify someone from the presidency. We've grown up since then, and just as we should by now be mature enough to understand that drinking a certain kind of coffee is utterly irrelevant to the ability to lead the Free World, we should also be adult enough to know that if marriage were about making babies, the state would never have allowed elderly couple marriage licenses and would have made the issuance of said licenses conditional on the passing of fertility tests.
And now it is 2013. The Childish Debate over same-sex marriage is so over. It has been demonstrated over and over and over again ad nauseam that there is no rational reason to restrict the institution of marriage to heterosexual couples. Same-sex marriage is as obvious and as indubitable as 2 + 2 = 4, and anyone who still doubts this refuses to grow up and learn. It is that simple.
But, of course, doubters of basic arithmetic are just stupid; doubters of same-sex marriage are not only stupid but filled with hatred against Gays and Lesbians. They believe that only Straights are capable of love, that Gays and Lesbians are interested only in their own selfish orgasmic gratification and therefore incapable of the loving, self-sacrificing commitment that marriage calls for. And thus these childish bigots dehumanize our Gay and Lesbian Brothers and Sisters. This is hatred on par with racism and anti-Semitism. If these childish bigots had been alive in the South between 1865 and 1965, they would have been Klan Members. And there is no doubt in my mind that had they been Germans in the 1930s, they would also have been rabid Nazis. I don't think even Descartes could have doubted that. Hatred is hatred, and de-humanization is always de-humanization.
Ergo, if you oppose the legal recognition of same-sex marriage at this stage of Historical Maturity, you have no excuse. You've had nine years to grow up and learn, but you chose to stick your fingers in your ears and listen to nothing but your own hatred. You deserve nothing but scorn and contempt, and if you are a wedding photographer or a florist who refuses your vitally essential services to brides and brides and grooms and grooms, then on top of that scorn and contempt, you should be fined and, perhaps, even jailed.
So are we clear now? Opposition to same-sex marriage is nothing but vile bigotry. If you don't want to be as evil as the KKK or the Nazis, you must embrace same-sex marriage.
But that's not enough. Not by a long shot. Accepting same-sex marriage means only that you are eighteen, old enough to be held responsible but still not wise enough to know everything that responsibility entails. There is still more growing up to do.
For instance, you may support marriage equality but still think that having a mother and a father is somehow normal. But if you do, then you have wittingly or no committed yourself to a most ghastly bigotry, that having two mothers or two fathers is somehow abnormal. This demeans and, hence, de-humanizes the many Lesbian and Gay couples who are raising children, whom you are also demeaning and de-humanizing.
You may think that adopting is a good and even noble way to spare a child of the horrors of the foster care system and give him or her a good, loving, stable home, but even so you take it for granted that this is not the normal way to have a child, that the normal way to have a child is for a man to impregnate a woman and then together raise that child. This is nothing but heterosexist delusion and is a demeaning (and de-humanizing--from now on whenever I use 'demeaning', please understand that I mean 'de-humanizing' as well for it takes too long to type out every single time) insult to Lesbian and Gay Couples who can acquire a meaningful family life only by means of what you consider to be second-rate, namely adoption. You are consigning Gay and Lesbian Families to second-class status, you infantile Nazi.
Equality means equality. That must be burned into our hearts and minds and skulls if ever we are to deepen our maturity and transcend our late adolescence. If heterosexual couples get to find self-fulfillment in having children, then Lesbians and Gays must have the very same opportunity. And no one way of having children, despite what you may remember from your high school biology class, can be singled out as "normal'. Otherwise, equality is simply meaningless rhetoric, and we might as well return to the Era of Auschwitz.
To be sure, coitus is the cause of the existence of at least 98% of the earth's population. Even so, it is first and foremost merely an act of intimacy just like anal sex, frottage, fisting, cunnilingus, et cetera. It is merely an accident of nature that coitus sometimes has a reproductive aspect, and accidents are no obstacle to equality. Skin color is an accident of nature. Does this mean we should not have racial equality? Only someone who wants to resurrect Jim Crow would think so. Coitus, therefore, must be considered to be just one act of intimacy among many. Otherwise, you are a heterosexist supremacist, and it should go without saying that that is the very definition of bigotry.
But someone may say that something that is responsible for the existence of at least 98% of the people living today cannot simply be just any act of intimacy. It must be instead Nature's way of ensuring the endurance of humanity. This particular form of bigotry assumes that Nature is a vile bigot that has privileged heterosexual activity for the perpetuation of the human species. But nature is not a homophobe. Otherwise, we would not find homosexuality in more than 400 species.
Nature really doesn't care about us anyway. If it did, do you really think Nature would periodically send us typhoons, earthquakes, plagues, et cetera to wipe us out? And why does Nature give us life only to let us die? Nature is indifferent to our fate and, hence, indifferent to our sexuality. And if you think that Nature somehow intended the specifically heterosexual act to be special, then not only are you a homophobic bigot, but you might also be a male chauvinist pig who is arrogant enough to believe that he has the authority to tell women what they should do with their vaginas.
When we finally learn to appreciate the indifference of Nature and by extension the universe, that nothing matters to it, not heterosexuality or homosexuality, not our births or our deaths, not anything at all, then we are finally free of all bigotry and at long last at the final stage of the Maturation Process, or what a Hegelian would call the End of History when everyone and everything is completely equal because nothing matters.
In other words, nihilism cures all bigotry.