Well, not entirely. The other thread suggests in its title and original post that members of certain biological groups can be described as having behavioral traits endemic to being in that group. That seemingly absurd notion has been challenged, but the challenge is refuted by some of the more outspoken champions of this thread.
It's a goose and gander thing. If it is okay for advocates of gay rights to assign behavioral traits on the basis of biological group membership, then it is okay for other people to make similar assignments.
So all I need do to morally oppose gay marriage is believe those who suggest that gay people, regardless of which other gay people comprise their potential circle of friends, lack the requisite behavioral traits to be a married couple. And I can suggest, again morally, that the ability to conceive a child with my marital partner, is a behavioral trait necessary to support marriage rights.
The moral basis for the insistence on rights without regard to behavioral traits, which I have persistently and consistently supported, is called into question by the stereotypical discussion going on elsewhere.
