"Waiting for the day when Christians will be considered 'bigots' for not accepting gay marriage"
Christians who actually follow the teachings of the mythical Jewish hippie on a stick? Some (including me) may consider them deluded, but we don't consider them bigots. Now Paul-worshipping fundie fucks like you who use their religion as a pretext to spew their bile and hatred, well, these ones have alway been bigots...
"even when it goes against their 2000+ year old religious beliefs."
It was already said, but it bears repeating: FUCK YOUR BELIEFS, FACTS OR GTFO!
"When people can no longer speak against gay marriage for fear of being labeled a 'hate mongerer' or someone 'against human rights.'"
Well, there is an easy solution to your problem: don't be one... Oh, and the word is "hatemonger", ya dimwit.
"This is the ultimate goal...to tear apart Christianity"
Unwarranted self-importance much? Shove your persecution complex where the sun doesn't shine, gays simply want equal rights. And if the mere fact that people have the gall to exist unmolested while not following (a very minor part of) your "holy" text is enough to tear apart your religion, it is a pretty worthless one, isn't it? Or is it your faith that is that fragile?
"and destroy one of the greatest liberties given to us in this country...to practice our religion freely without fear of government control."
You have the right to practice your religion, as long as it doesn't conflict with the law (and remember, your god-man told you to obey secular laws and leaders: render unto Caesar, bitch! :P); you do not have the right to have your prejudices enshrined into the law.
"The goal should be to get government out of the marriage business entirely. All tax breaks and benefits that are given to married couples should be removed. Gay marriage should be decided by states alone. Those who don't accept gay marriage should be free to exercise their beliefs without fear of reprisal."
Can someone explain the point of states rights? Seriously, I'm asking: I just can't understand how someone could ever think that having about fifty slightly different legal codes would be a good idea... (or even just thirteen ones, if you go back to the American Revolution) I know that the US are a federation, but seriously, you had a war to put the notion that states have a right to secede to rest, it is dead, buried, staked through the heart and its head buried separately under a crossroad with its mouth filled with salt, it won't come back, so what the fuck is the point of states rights!? I get that there are some local matters that should be handled by the local government, but things like legislation about marriage/death penalty/age of consent/age to get a gun or driving licence, or school curriculum are not among them. Why do Americans object to rationalising and streamlining their legal system?
@SpukiKitty:
No human rights should be decided by states. Human rights are automatic & for everyone! State's Rights only works for other stuff like taxes, economy, law enforcement, etc. State's Rights should not be applied to ethnic, religious, disability, sex & gender groups! If I hear another hick a-jawin' about "STATE'S RAAHTS!" again, I'm gonna turn into She-Hulk & go medieval on your heiny!
I approve your choice of superheroines, particularly since Shulkie has plenty of options to deal with such a moron: smash him, sue him, lecture him about what the law actually says... (and when a 6'7" green-skinned amazon who can bench-press a skyscrapper speaks, even the most dim-witted idiot listens :P)
