You do realise that a lot of people are going to be offended for you grouping gay marriage in with bestiality, right? Besides, bestiality is the act of a human having sex with an animal. Gay marriage might not even involve sex at all. What you'd use for that argument is to denounce homosexual acts themselves, and I'm afraid you're decades late to that party, my friend.

Your analogy between race and sexual orientation is invalid. A black man can not change his mind and become white nor can a female change her mind and become male. Those are genetic traits. Sexual activity is a choice and does change among some people. Their have been no studies to show that their is a gay gene. Thus calling someone a bigot or a homophobe over their view on sexual orientation is not valid and does not address the issue at hand. Why attack some one's character why not attack there argument. Here are links of people who once engaged in homo sexual activity and have now engage in hetro sexual activity. Even the associated press agreed not to use homophobe or biggot when it comes to people who are pro marriage between a man and a woman.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Ex-homosexuals

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/11/ap-wont-let-you-call-homophobia-homophobia/59324/

And here we go with the cyclic argument...

Listen, if being gay was a choice, who would choose it? It's one of the most socially rejected, culturally supressed groups in history. So tell me, WHY would people CHOOSE to be part of such a group if they had the choice? Are you implying that they're self-masochists or something? No, I don't think you're using quite a logical path of reasoning here..

Woooow, you have a list, of people who have changed their minds. Does that mean that their mindset has changed? Of course not. For all you know, these people were a shade of bisexual (which ALL of us are) and decided to move from one aspect to another. You'll probably find that there's also a list of ex-heterosexuals, too if you look hard enough. Problem is, that wouldn't help your argument now, would it?

Your press does a lot of things to appease the whingy right-wing. Calling them out on their bullshit is now apparently bias. The result? Rampant right-wing bullshit smeared everywhere.

How would you possibly prove that an animal was consenting?  they by law can't be consenting just like no matter how much a pedophile gets a 12 year old to say they consent it doesn't matter.  Gay marriage doesn't have this issue because both members are already consenting adults so there's a clear enough line crossing from gay marriage to bestiality that I don't find that to be a valid argument.  

Here's a list of homophobes that turned out to be gay afterall: http://gayhomophobe.com/

People who used to have same-sex relations and are now in heterosexual relationships are either bisexual or they're lying to themselves on a daily basis.

that's not true though, people can change their gender.  You're just saying that switching genders is more difficult than changing your sexual preference but I don't think that's a good reason and some would actually argue the opposite.  Yes there are many people who have no trouble switching from one sexual orientation to the next, but that makes them bisexual and still isn't a reasonable expectation for all gay people that they can all switch like that.  

Like I said, I can't come up with a valid argument against gay marriage, mainly because I support it or at the very least, I am indiferent. 

I should have expanded on bestiality but I got lazy and hafl-assed the post. Long story short, if a man can prove that he loves and animal and that animal loves him back equally (which I admit would be hard as fuck to do if not impossible) and he wants to ger married, can we stop him? By letting gays get married, it would be we no longer consider marriage to be between exclusively a man and woman. Now, you could deny it by saying  that its interspecies love/marriage is wrong, blah blah blah. I really don't see why anybody would be butthurt about gay marriage. I mean, you're not getting married, it doesnt involve you in the least so why oppose it.

At the end of the day, its religion. IT IS ALWAYS RELIGION.

Hell, i don't know, I don't fuck goats but i'm sure there are sleazy lawyers who could twist their way into making the animal have consent.

Like I said, without religion, what can we possibly argue to go against gay marriage. "gay people make me uncomfortable?" so do certain races/ethnicites but we can't ban them. "It is immoral and will lead to a perverse society!" We can't get more fucked up that we are now and guys buttfucking and women scisoring isn't that crazy anyhow.

Fordy said

And here we go with the cyclic argument...

Listen, if being gay was a choice, who would choose it? It's one of the most socially rejected, culturally supressed groups in history. So tell me, WHY would people CHOOSE to be part of such a group if they had the choice? Are you implying that they're self-masochists or something? No, I don't think you're using quite a logical path of reasoning here..

Woooow, you have a list, of people who have changed their minds. Does that mean that their mindset has changed? Of course not. For all you know, these people were a shade of bisexual (which ALL of us are) and decided to move from one aspect to another. You'll probably find that there's also a list of ex-heterosexuals, too if you look hard enough. Problem is, that wouldn't help your argument now, would it?

Your press does a lot of things to appease the whingy right-wing. Calling them out on their bullshit is now apparently bias. The result? Rampant right-wing bullshit smeared everywhere.

Show me where science says that you are born that way.  There is 0 scientific evidence today comes to that assertion.  Friend you are the one slinging the bullshit because you have nothing to back up your assertion.  I am showing examples of people changing there orientation.  If you are born that way it would be impossible.  People make stupid choices all the time.  Look how many people voted for obama.

I agree. It is religion. You did raise an interesting, non-religious point though.

With this, if we managed to someday interpret animal thought and consent, I think you'd see a LOT of changes happen overnight. The world would not be the place that we see it today. Besides bestiality, I'd say a lot of people would willingly turn vegan, with a hard push for governments to ban meat consumption. Animals would suddenly get a lot more rights, too. Bestiality and marriage would be some of them. 

However, it would need to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that it's consent and not another reaction such as stress. It's a case of interpreting the mind outside of the mind, which is impossible to do. For example, how are we supposed to know that my mind interprets the colour red the exact same way as your mind? It's literally impossible to determine..