I hope you go on to have many many children to love. I can tell you would be an outstanding father:)

a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own.

So, the first requirement for this person to be labeled a bigot is “prejudice”. Now, suppose the person holds no ill opinion of gay people in thinking, that they should have the freedom to love whoever they want, and be in a loving relationship as everyone else, blah, blah, blah. But, why against same-sex marriage? Why is marriage reserved only for heterosexual couples only?

The point of T’s posts in this series is to point out the injustices of labeling homosexual parents as “bad parents”, even in comparison to horrible heterosexual parents, who are *AUTOMATICALLY ASSUMED TO BE BETTER PARENTS than the best of homosexual parents. This injustice flies in the face of studies showing gay parents are just as good of parents as their heterosexual counterparts. So the argument that heterosexual parents are inherently better than their homosexual counterparts clearly provides no argument against sames-sex marriage.

Of course, same-sex couples cannot make babies — so they must adopt, artificially inseminate or go outside of their relationship in order to make babies. However, the same thing applies to infertile heterosexual couples, and yet they are allowed to marry. So, clearly, infertility (or unnatural procreation) is not a reason against same-sex marriage.

We already know, that heterosexual parents can turn out good children who become productive members of the society. How does homosexual parents fare when it comes to raising their children? Do all of the children become gay as well? Studies show, that children raised with homosexual parents are just as normal and typically heterosexual as the heterosexual parents do, with one crucial difference: the children tend to be more open minded and explore new ideas than those raised by heterosexual parents. So, again, that’s not an argument against same-sex marriage either.

So, what is the argument against same-sex marriage? What it usually boils down to is one’s personal religious beliefs. However, personal religious beliefs are *NOT* rational thinking or logical argument. By definition, religious beliefs are taken in by faith — in absence and/or in contrary to logical or rational thinking. So one may go so far as saying that a person using religious arguments against same-sex marriage is prejudiced against same-sex marriage, since it is a preconceived notion that is not based on reason or actual experience.

So, in absence of any other reason against same-sex marriage, being against same-sex marriage, the person is intolerant of lifestyles or identities of gay folks who want to get married. By using religious beliefs, the person is being prejudiced against sames-sex couples who want to get married. If the person insist upon rejecting same-sex marriage — is that not, by your definition, OL, a bigot?

Thinking that an entire group of people deserve to be second-class citizens based on their sexual orientation makes you a bigot. Gays aren’t asking that straight people give up any of their basic rights, so your argument that T is a bigot is ridiculous, given that he is not in fact intolerant of opinions, lifestyles or identities differing from his own — unless you mean that he dislikes bigotry, which he does. But pointing out bigotry is not the same as being a bigot. Do you see Terrance calling City Hall and demanding that fundamentalist bigots have their marriage rights removed? Do you see him saying that conservative religious people shouldn’t be allowed to adopt children? Do you even see him saying that people shouldn’t have the right to say idiotic bigoted things if they so choose? Do you see him trying to limit anyone’s rights, or doing anything else that exhibits actual intolerance as opposed to disagreement, frustration and anger?

I would suggest re-reading your definition of “bigot” if you need further assistance.

But if anyone were ever to suggest to my face that my aunt and uncle, who have one biological child and had two adopted children (one of whom has since died), somehow distinguish between “first class” and “second class” love between their two surviving children, especially in the wake of the tragic loss of their third child, then one of us would end up with a broken nose.

The capacity of some bigots to willfully confuse compassion with cruelty never ceases to amaze me.