There are many homophobic Christians in Australia. The Galaxy poll suggests 47% of Christians are homophobic. (53% support marriage equality.) Why should this 47% of 64% of the population (the percentage of Christians in Australia according to the last census) force its minority view on the majority of Australian society? A mere 6,700,000 homophobes forcing their minority view on 17,700,000 other people. (Figures rounded). How can such an imposition be morally (not theologically) justified?

The term "marriage equality" means that this is a debate about the human right of equality under the law. I am speaking specifically about marriage equality as opposed to marriage inequality.

What is the moral good in inequality? (Homophobia promotes inequality.)

Associated with those questions is: What is the harm in equality?

If all anyone has to answer these questions is subjective interpretation of fallible bible verses then it isn't much of a sound valid argument. It is only relevant to Christians who believe subjective interpretation of fallible bible verses.

They embody the exact opposite of the command to "love your neighbour as yourself" as they treat the neighbour differently than one treats oneself. They embody the exact opposite of the fruit of the Spirit:"love ... forbearance, kindness, goodness .. "

All Christian notions of God and "biblical ethics" ( and thus marriage inequality itself) rely on "subjective interpretations of fallible bible verses". Breaking that phrase down:

- "subjective interpretations" All Christian concepts have their roots in bible verses as understood by fallible humans. None of it is totally objective. This means that there are often multiple interpretations of the same bible verse.

- "fallible bible verses". The bible was written by humans and has all the flaws of human writing. Though some parts are history much of it is not history. The bible has not been proven to be inerrant. If every word is "God's Word" then why has God placed so many errors withing the text and words within the Hebrew and Greek that have lost their original meaning? If the bible is "God's Word' and totally reliable then which is the one and only true ending to Mark's gospel as there are several endings written by different people at different stages in time? The bible also contains pseudo-graphs which, in modern parlance, we would call "forgery".

If one takes love as a good as the premise then it has ramifications within Christian dogma and theology where love is central. It also has huge ramifications for Christian marriage inequality.

Christians have a long history of opposing the granting of rights to groups. There is a distinct pattern.

Racism (including slavery): In the past Christian groups argued that people of colour were inferior using bible verses and "the curse of Ham". Slave advocates quoted the fact that the bible condones slavery in both the New and Old Testament. They denied equal rights to people of colour.

Sexism: In the past Christian groups argued that women were to be under the "covering" of a male and quoted bible verses to deny women the same rights as men. For example, opposing women as clergy.

Exactly the same is now happening as Christians argue for marriage inequality that denies equal rights to the LGBTI community.

The premises upon which Christian marriage inequality is built upon are largely invalid arguments such as the following fallacies:
- the appeal to history
- special pleading
- the texas sharp shooter
- genetic
- slippery slope
- appeal to fear
- composition / division
- appeal to emotion
(Not an exhaustive list.)

I haven't seen a single argument for Christian marriage inequality that has not used at least one of the fallacies above.