Ok, lets say you get a chance to speak to an anti gay politician or activist. Here is a line of yes or no questions that unless they outright lie will concede that gay people should be able to get married just like anyone else. It’s pretty fun because about halfway through they see the problem with their argument (nomatter what that argument is) and get livid as hell and refuse to answer any more questions.
Does the first amendment grant freedom of religion?
Obvious answer, yes, otherwise they are lying or stupid (or both)
Does there exist a separation between church and state?
Also another simple one, yes
Is homosexuality banned in all religions?
Should be simple, no it isn’t. If they need help, remind them that not only are there christian churches that allow homosexuality, there are also wide assortments of religions from Buddhism and Hinduism to Wicca and many many more that accept homosexuality and have no problem at all with gay marriage.
So, why are you against gay marriage?
Nomatter what their argument is, it will have something to do with religion.
After these questions, if they are still calm enough to talk to you, point out that their answer to number four is automatically null due to the answers to one through three. Ask them if they have a non-religious reason, or if they’re ready to stop going against our established laws and constitutional rights and vote for gay marriage to be accepted.
Now, most republicans will get so angry halfway through this line of questions that they will refuse to talk to you, refuse to answer any questions, or begin to call you names or insulting you, or being extremely evasive and hostile. This is because they already know they are wrong, they are just trying to stick with their arguments and supporters and don’t want to be called out as liars with no real reason to make gay marriage illegal. There may however be some that pull some other form of arguments out of their ass, arguments such as:
A marriage is for procreation, and same sex couples can’t make a baby- Point out that this would mean they would have to go out and terminate all marriages of those who are infertile, those who have already had kids and are wanting to get married, those who are getting married who are too old to have kids, etc. It would be one step away from choosing who people marry based on genetic compatibility.
It spreads diseases- Point out that if only homosexuals have diseases that argument would make sense.
There are probably a handful of other easy to beat arguments they could try to make in desperation, but those will be laughable and make them look foolish. They will either be forced to admit that it contradicts the constitution to disallow gay marriage, or they will make themselves look like complete idiots.
Have fun, and please let me know how your debates go.