Some food for thought.. ...Frankly, as a member of the LGBT, I used to support gay marriage. That was .. until I realized I wasn't a 'member' of the LGBT 'community', simply because there is no such thing. Do blue-eyed people have a 'blue-eyed community'? Do deaf people have a 'deaf-community'? I know that some do, but isn't that just self-discrimination in a way? Isn't that kinda like a worker-men's club? Do you speak on behalf of all gay people, or only the ones who dress like this and that? Based on my recent observation, the LGBT 'community' has become more of a religious sect than any actual human rights movement. We already have more opportunities and rights than anywhere else in the world, and yet some of 'us' are still not happy. Why even create a third gender .. when the whole point of gender is to identify one subset of organisms who create the eggs, and another subset of organisms that fertilizes them? How would a third gender fit into that picture? Even transsexuals aren't happy being labeled as a Third gender as far as i'm concerned.. they usually desire to be one or the other. There's people who are Gender-queer, but that's still not a third gender .. that's just an individual whose self-image exhibits a mixture of the two genders. That's where I'm afraid both liberals and conservatives got everything mixed up, till the shit hit the fan .. and gay and trans people lost more rights than they gained.. just because of a pissy, petty debate about definitions and pro-nouns .. giving rise to the Alt-right .. and hate groups beyond our worst nightmares, hell-bent on trying to undo the progressive changes brought upon by the previous administrations .. So should gay people be allowed to marry? Well, the thing is . . there's a thing called civil unions, which gay people are already allowed to participate in. Marriage is more of a religious dominion.. and to have the state force religions to invite individuals to their ceremonies would be complete violation of the separation of church and state, something Libertarians should take note of. The state DOES and SHOULD have the authority to stop religious organizations from violating the rights of others, and causing them actual harm ... however, preventing some people from getting married isn't causing them any actual harm.. any more than a business owner refusing to hire somebody, simply because they don't want to hire that individual .. or a house-owner asking someone to stop their dog from shitting on their front lawn. If a church wants to decide to accommodate gay people, that should be entirely up to the church, of course.. so it's really not a government issue, it's more of a religious community / private property issue. Religious communities are a private property / business, in a way, and it's up to them to sort their internal affairs out. And frankly.. this whole shaving-one-side-of-your-head... dying your hair green .. wearing lobe-gauging ear-rings that make you look like Dumbo the Elephant.. and then walking out in the streets with a leather g-string with a bunch of pink feathers ..... well, do it in Carnival, but just don't make it about Me. Me? I just wanna be me. A normal skirt and lipstick-wearing lady with long hair.. who may end up dating another normal, skirt-and-lipstick wearing lady. Kids? I don't know about kids, adoption seems to be the lesser-of-two evils.. helping a lonely kid out, as opposed to bringing more children to this already over-populated world .. but ideally if one is going to procreate, then the child should have a father and a mother who love each other and are serious about staying together and not divorcing. And yeh, that's another problem with marriage these days.. too many damn divorces, children ending up with single mothers and then growing up with issues (like I did!) .. but that's another topic of debate. So yeah, all in all .. it's not about supporting or not supporting gay marriage .. it's about thinking about what marriage actually means, and whether the government should stick its finger in the cake or not. And whether couples should have an advantage over single people in a society in terms of government-handouts.