I'm not trying to make an argument, I'm trying to make a point. Actually, two points.
1) You should always know why you believe what you believe and be able to state it as clearly and succintly as possible. "It's obvious" may be required, but should seldom be used. In asking you the question, I was asking you if you can state why you believe what you believe?
2) Our society must protect the rights of individuals because if it did not do so it would cease to be our society and the humanity of every individual would suffer as a result. Those who were not directly impacted by black slavery were indirectly impacted by allowing it to continue. They had to "check part of their humanity at the door" to be able to turn their heads at such cruel and inhumane treatment of human beings. Simply put, you are lessened when you refuse to get involved when a wrong is committed - even if that wrong doesn't involve you. That is why you get involved. Not only are you lessened, but the society in which you thrive is lessened and will ultimately be destroyed. You are your brother's keeper and you suffer if you won't act the part.
Having made that point, it is my contention that by allowing sexual immorality to continue we are also lessened as human beings and our society is lessened. By not standing up for right you are plowed under by wrong. Homosexuals need our help, not our condescension, and not our "tolerance". If we can't recognize that and stand up for it, we will all suffer just as our nation would have suffered if it had tolerated black slavery to continue - actually as our nation has suffered because of our history of black slavery.
All that evil needs to succeed is for good men to do nothing.
Shalom.
Matters of life and death are clear cut. I don't want someone to kill me. That deprives me of my life, my right to life. Therefore, I won't kill others and deny them the rights I expect to enjoy. I won't allow others to kill if I can prevent it. Genuine matters of human rights are just that objective.
Matters of morality are a lot more subjective. That's why they should remain the realm of the home and church, not the state. You may think someone smoking pot or having sex with the wrong person is "damaging to society", but I hope you can admit that that's decidedly subjective. The guy who sits in his house and smokes a joint Saturday afternoon does me no harm. I have no standing to prevent him from making that choice, even though I think it's an unwise habit.
No doubt there are people (perhaps even you) who think MTV, miniskirts, and alcohol are damaging to society and would choose to outlaw those if they had the political power to do so. But we live in a free nation that respects differences and strives for a utilitarian coexistance. Imposing your subjective morality on others when there is no clear force or fraud commited against you or others is an illegitimate usurpation of government force for the purpose of imposing your values on others.
I'm all for morality. But I think it's dangerous, futile, and unconstitutional to put moral enforcement in the hands of government.