"The “equal rights” slogan misses the point. No one is denying anyone the option to marry (the opposite sex)."
That little parenthetical aside you so gleefully glossed over is the point.
"Instead, this movement asks for a new special legal form of marriage that never existed before, even though it lacks the complementarity and procreative qualities of natural marriage."
The number of things wrong with this sentence is amusing to me.
Let's see. First, it's not a "new special legal form of marriage" as most marriage laws, perhaps all, don't explicitly state it must be between people of opposite genders, hence the religious nuts attempting to place such language into law--particularly into the Constitution of all places. The fact that a specific type of marriage hadn't previously existed is the exact argument that was used against interracial marriages. It was a baseless argument then, as it is now.
Second, your statement that "even though it lacks the complimentarity[sic] and procreative qualities of natural marriage" shows just how little thought you've actually put into your argument and how much of a knee-jerk reaction it really is. If such a thing were necessary for marriage then it would exclude anyone who is infertile, doesn't want to have children by choice or would rather adopt. Should they also be refused marriage rights?
"Research has shown that same-sex relationships do not have the stability of heterosexual counterparts (granted there is room for improvement among heterosexuals here too)."
From what I understand, theirs are much more likely to result in stable and monogamous relationship. Partly because they have less options to choose from, being a minority, so they're more likely to attempt to work things out and stay together rather than face the prospect of having to look for a proverbial needle in a haystack to start a new relationship.
"Unlike “Will & Grace,” 75% of same-sex couples do not stay together for more than 7 years, and monogamy is uncommon (which is also a contributing factor to the disproportionate rates of STDs, etc.)."
Cite your source. And it had better not be some religious "study" either.
"Children need and crave stable families. It’s not a matter of hate, but debate. I don’t want to see people hurt in the long-run."
No. You simply want to see your fellow citizens denied basic civil rights which you, yourself, enjoy and never had to actually earn.