So, speaking as the thing that goes bump in the night (NRX, HBD, the works), I'd agree that your average anti-gay-marriage person is not reading Leviticus and p

So, speaking as the thing that goes bump in the night (NRX, HBD, the works), I'd agree that your average anti-gay-marriage person is not reading Leviticus and pulling out political positions based on such. I'd even agree that it's a proxy debate. But I don't think the real issue is crypto-racism. I mean, for one, I'm what you'd call a "racist" and I don't mention such to my anti-gay marriage family. I mean, hey, if racists and homophobes are all one big happy family, they'd know it, right? All I can say is that I'd advise you to take it in good faith when someone says they're against gay marriage and abhor racism. I'm not one of those people, but I used to be, and there are many of them. (Another way you can tell: when conservatives parody protected classes by assigning as many statuses as they can think of, often they will come up with the black disabled lesbian with a liberal arts degree. But that would be an object of glee rather than outrage for the person you describe: the suicidal enemy. That conservatives don't like the BDL tells me that they don't really consider the homosexual part (or the degree!) a handicap. That's a victory, of a sort, for someone) But I do think you're right that it's a proxy debate. I think it's an attempt to re-fight the sexual revolution, and gay marriage is seen as yet more lost ground on that front. Was this a viable political strategy? Intuitively no, and empirically, definitely no. But voters gonna vote.