I just want to clarify that I'd be fine with having civil unions as a solution, but when you push to redefine a gender-specific institution like marriage it's going to lead to have a lot of unfortunate implications. Separate but equal has been vilified over the years but it is a lot more nuanced than its critics let on.
Yeah, that was a defensible position for the right 10 years ago, but now it comes across as desperation because you recognize certain defeat on the terms of marriage.
So again, if you think that inherent gender qualifications are illegal on marriage, why do you support them on public restrooms? If you think that a separate but equal solution stigmatizes all gays as sick freaks, why do you find the bathroom restrictions not stigmatizing all men as perverts and all women as fragile little girls?
Because the right to choose who you marry is substantially more important to one's sense of self-worth than where you go to the bathroom. Done.
Right, but the vast majority of people feel self-worth with existing marriage laws just like the vast majority of people have no problem with bathroom segregation. Only a tiny minority feel otherwise. If the 2% who are gay have the right to change the definition of marriage, then the small number of people offended by bathroom segregation have a right to change it too.
Unfortunately for your side and your argument, a majority of now Americans want to "change the definition of marriage." You're woefully behind the curve on this.
