Your argument is illogical. Whether a same-sex couple has their relationship recognized or not will have absolutely zero impact on whether that couple will “generate offspring”.

And if we are dismissing the civil rights of individuals based on whether they “contribute to aforementioned survival”, then Catholic Bishops should be first in line to have “no equal status”.

The substance of Cordileone’s actions aside, it takes A LOT (i.e. an impossible amount) of trust from my side to confide in the opinion, formed conscience and overall ability to judge phenomena of people who come up with ad-hom-arguments like “He looks gay and he’s probably in the closet and hates himself…” Utterly weak. Sure, in an era where public opinion and dispute are ruled by emotions, facts are simply unfair. But hey, you even manage to to the double back flip and would rather not have “supporters of discrimination as your own”. Congrats.

P.S.: Non-religious argument: Nature. Unless somebody finds proof that the survival of mankind will be ensured by relationships which generate no offspring. ‘But not all couples are gay, so no problem’. Right! And: Not all couples are hetero and contribute to aforementioned survival, hence no equal status.

And now fire away, clerophobes.

“Our primary argument is that marriage is a foundational institution in society that should be protected,” said Rev. Ted Haggard, president of the National Association of Evangelicals in Colorado Springs. Once marriage between a man and woman is protected, legislatures can do what they want to provide benefits for others in civil unions, he said.

Actually, if you go back and look at his statements, Haggard was less aggressively homophobic than others in his particular branch of religion. Yes, he was theologically and politically anti-gay, but he was nuanced (for example, there is some indication that he supported civil unions or other non-marriage arrangements).

And while there is no question that Haggard is same-sex attracted (at least bisexual in orientation), I really don’t want to claim him as part of my community.

let’s not jump to claim this guy as some secret closeted gay guy. Frankly, in my experience gay folks – even closeted gay folks – have compassion and empathy earned by the public reaction to their orientation – even if only suspected – and are less inclined to adamantly insist on rigid orthodoxy.

Besides, do we really want to claim supporters of discrimination as our own?