Christians response to gay marriage?

you just said : "You can convince yourself you're in love with anyone." Can you convince yourself that you are in love with your neighbor's wife?

I agree
That's not how it works
I'm not in love Rosanne Barr and no amount of trying to convince myself that I am is going to change that.

And I said it happened in the town I am living in. So no I can't reveal that info. on an open forum.

Standard equipment is normal female and male anatomy.

If you want logical and legal arguments you could start by reading the 1968 Supreme Court decision in Loving Vs Virginia

are their marriages being compared to bestiality?

Can you cite these studies?

OK. I have a friend who several weeks before her wedding was diagnosed with cervical and ovarian cancer. She had a total hysterectomy to save her life. She does not have standard female equipment. Does this fact invalidate her marriage?

so can you convince yourself that you are in love with your neighbor's wife? Yes or no?

Are you being silly? You're not making any sense.

No, and I never said that it did. With a hysterectomy she cannot have children, but she can still have sex with her husband.

If you're libertarian, then why not take the position that government should get out of marriage altogether? Civil marriage (from my own libertarian perspective) discriminates, because it creates legal classes by "marital status" and then treats them differently based on that status (tax codes, workplace benefits etc.). Why should people be rewarded by the government for what is essentially a lifestyle choice?

When "marriage" was "protected" by a SCOTUS decision, the SCOTUS essentially decided that marriage is what government says it is- when marriage (with respect to biblical marriage) should be (and ultimately IS- from a biblical perspective) an institution independent of civil authority.

I think the decision could have been made in earnest to protect marriage... but really marriage does not need the protection, validation, or approval of the government and I would add, married people do not NEED SPECIAL PRIVILIGES EITHER.

At the end of the day, rebellious-gay people are going to have their rebellious gay-sex: the government should not be in the business of rewarding people for sin and rebellion- and THAT is why there should be no gay marriage. We give the homosexuals, and all of the lgbt SPACE to REPENT... that is IT. No recognition, no acceptance, no reward. Tolerance, and not an inch more than tolerance and space to repent.

I'm on my mobile but took a couple pictures of the search page that's literally loaded with articles making my claim.

Because they are taxpaying citizens in their taxes pay the courthouse clerk's salaries so they should be entitled to the same privileges as any other tax paying citizen
Remember when the government had to get involved and tell States they can't discriminate against black people?

So it seems you are saying that you cannot force yourself to fall in love with someone of the same gender yet you have no trouble insisting that forcing your self to fall in love with someone others aren't romantically oriented to is no big deal. Apparently it is a big deal.

you suggested that "standard equipment" would be a better term than "correct": equipment as people without correct equipment can't be considered to be in a "real" marriage. But now you seem to be saying that equipment is irrelevant.