I am not understanding this legal ramifications point. 

So we should not ever legislate morality? But isn’t defining what is criminal an issue of morals in general? Where does this lead? Where does this end? So when I say murder is wrong are you going to call me religious?

 What about prostitution? Like Nevada should it be legal in all states. Then there are drugs, polygamy, and ultimately bestiality (I mean how can an animal ever give communicative consent and yet at my friends house her dog tries to hump my boots each time I am there – is that consent? Should I have at it. Am I negligent to the dogs needs? [Rather I kick her away]).

Now drugs and prostitution in some instances benefit from it being illegal - for it keeps prices high. Honestly I have seen the destructiveness of polygamy it lessens the relationships and causes all kinds of neglect and abuse throughout the family. I have not seen anything by my own eyes in a homosexual relationship so I cannot speak to its destructiveness. But where does it end?

If you don’t grant these and fight for these at the same time as “equal marriage” are not biased? Are you not being selfish for wanting only what you want?

It seems to me (I am not an educated man or smart) that this is the same type of logic the Nazis used for killing gays, Jews, cripples, etc.! “We were just following our law” they would say; and in order to defend that killing GAYS was wrong the allied attorneys appealed to Natural moral law.

Just because it is legal or illegal don’t make it write. The majority may rule but that does not mean the majority is not wrong.