Like I said, "Any good reply can be condensed. Condense it."
You don't really want a discussion, you want to drive the interlocutor away by making it too much trouble for them to engage you.
You just proved my point.
Yada yada yada.
Like I said, if you had something to say, you could boil it down to something quick and easy for everyone to comprehend. Instead, you hid behind a wall of words.
You didn't really want a discussion, you found a way that usually works to avoid it.
You're a success.
But I don't think most people bother to read your long-winded, overblown, bloated essays.
It is based on the idea that being gay is a sin and we should not legally allow such a sin to take place. However being married if the woman is not a virgin is a sin so the argument holds no true ground. And losing your virginity is almost always certainly a choice whereas being gay might not be. As a christian I think that the argument against gay marriage is stupid and it should be legal.
If (and it's a huge "if") it could be shown that children of gay parents are severely disadvantaged in some way, that would be a point against gay marriage. But we already let crack dealers marry alcoholics and have children, don't we?