Couple months ago, I laid my opinion on a post about pro or against same-sex marriage. I claimed at that time that I opposed same-sex marriage and gave my reasons in the following link: http://tieba.baidu.com/p/1995499873?pn=1. Now I briefly present my points for the sake of the discussion:
1. The legalization of same-sex marriage would lead to polygamy and incest.
2. By taking taxes from the individuals and groups of people (especially religious and conservative groups) who abhor the act of homosexuality, oppose the same-sex marriage law, and despite the same-sex couples, the government could infringe the right and violate the freedom of those people.
3. Same-sex marriage could result in increasing bad parenting.
From that post, my claims were strongly opposed by people from the perspective of human rights to that of logical unsoundness.
To the second one, I joyfully accept the fact that there are some logical holes in my argument and those flaws diminish the force of my reasoning.
To the first one, I seemed to be a conservative barbarian flying in the face of the human conscience and civilization, which was not true. To these people who believe that they are progressive and what they propose and support could in no doubt bring the advances of our society and advent of the new era of human equality, I think the recourse to the government is utterly erroneous and dangerous.

i agree！
cause everyone has the right to chase after their love，whatever they are。

homosexual marriage~~~~it is not uncommon for adults of the same sex to share a bed
,but marriage in china?it won't happen~~~

Full equality for all/Lady Gaga

Homosexual marriage grosses me out, but I give my respect to it.

Being a faithful Catholic, I cannot support homosexual marriages, but I do not have any problems with homosexuals; since its less hazardous than say, psychopaths, or politicians.

to be honest, i dont care about it.
as long as it wont affect my life

cool.that sayings like"genders dont matter in love"well approve of it.

That law case is from the other side of the ocean, too far away to become the fact in the land of our country. My second claim is real and true for every country in this world: By raising taxes from the individuals and groups of people (especially religious and conservative groups) who abhor the act of homosexuality, oppose the same-sex marriage law, and despite the same-sex couples, the government could infringe the right and violate the freedom of those people. I think everyone can pick out the problem in this claim----even though the rights and the freedom of some people are eroded, how can one give out the solution by ignoring the fact that other groups of people are discriminated and underprivileged? This is incorrect I admit. Were a libertarian, one would be against my claim by stating that the contract, named marriage, is the volunteer decision made by two adults, which cannot be violated by the third party. This is a very good idea to this controversy. I think according to libertarianism, marriage as the independent institution should be separated from states like what American Founding Fathers wrote in the paper of the Independent Declaration and the Constitution---the separation of the religion from the state.
In China, government controls almost everything, from contents of TV series and movies (State Administration of Radio, Film, and Television), to food and drugs we eat (China Food and Drugs Administration), and places we live (the government claims the national property). People in this land don’t enjoy much liberty to choose and don’t know they have such rights. If you think the conservatives are like Father who instructs you which you are supposed to act which are forbidden, the big government (nanny state) is like Mother who attends to every needs a person has. None of them regards the individual adult as an adult with reason and rationality. What’s worse, Chinese government is both of them in a limited way. It tells you what are supposed to do and pretends to be for your good but does not. The reasonable way to promote the same-sex marriage is not to give more power towards the government in which the government official have much to intervene our private life, but to separate the marriage from the state.

To my last point, opponents usually flood me with hundreds of statistics and
scientific reports from world-renowned institutions. I regard them as neither
sufficient nor necessary. Actually, I can’t help myself recalling the familiar
conclusion made by leftist intellectuals only with premature proofs in last
century that the demise of capitalism is coming. As all we know, the demise
eventually befell on the communism which was believed to be progressive and
humane anyway, and meanwhile many socialist experiments encountered the
difficulties and those states were forced to have recourse to capitalism or
partial of capitalism. The similarity is that people with reason tend to believe
that they find the truth or the rule, the law of Nature which unfortunately is
merely the exception. The feeling of rational superiority masks our eyes and
our mind ironically. How can scientists conclude from only decades of
observation and experiments (astoundingly on animals) that same-sex parenting
is not harmful to children or even more beneficial to children than traditional
one without taking into the consideration of natural optimization? If one
believes it, why does human not evolves to be monosexual or not establish the
norms in favor of the same-sex marriage and parenting?

If one read through all my words, one would know that I did not bigot against any gay, lesbians, bisexual and transsexual individual. What I oppose is briefly the following:
1.Resorts to the government.
2.Blindly optimism on rationality of human and progressionism of social reform.