Regarding number 1, the Bible lists many "abominations" to God, most of which are currently accepted and practiced by American society -- even those living in the so-called "Bible belt."
The word "abomination" is used 67 times in the Revised Standard Version of the Bible. It appears twice in the New Testament -- in Revelation 21:27 which says that anyone who practices abomination will not enter Heaven and in Luke 16:15 where Jesus defines the love of money as an abomination to God.
In the Old Testament, the word “abomination” appears 65 times. Five of those refer to something as being an abomination to another people and not necessarily to God. Of those practices hated by God himself, 13 of them refer to restrictions on eating shellfish and some other crawling insect, 17 warn against improper sacrifice, 3 prohibit adultery (and include sex with another after divorce), 2 passages decry the love of money, 4 verses cite dishonest trading practices as abominations, 12 verses list behaviors ranging from murder to women wearing "anything that pertains to a man" (for example, pants). Eight passages, including the one from Revelation, are not clear about what they mean by "abomination."
Only 2 Old Testament verses (zero from the New Testament) refer to homosexual behavior as an abomination to God.
And, lest we forget, homosexuality as we define it today was not understood as such in Biblical times.
As for the objection to gay and lesbian sex, many people -- gay and straight -- have sex out of marriage. Just as many people -- gay and straight -- are married and do not have sex. Besides, the Supreme Court in
And lastly, the American Psychological Association's 2004 policy statement says that gay and lesbian parents are "as likely as heterosexual parents to provide supportive and healthy environments for their children" and 7 other nationwide professional organizations have concurred.
There are no valid legal objections to equal marriage rights. That being said, the
As society progresses (I hope) toward tolerance and acceptance of gay men and lesbians, it would be a real tragedy if the ultimate outcome of this case results in an anti-equality precedent that will be relied on by equal marriage opponents for many years to come.