He's not actually talking about him hating gay people, he is talking about how he supports gay people.

People burning the jews saw it moral, what if they truly believed that they were cleansing?

Either way that's all passed because the majority of the planet was against it. Sure it was immoral, but you can't do anything about it, until you have numbers, which in this case was like the planet against these guys who decided to cleanse the land of what they thought needed cleansing.

America saw how afghanistan was treating their civilians, America saw it as Immoral, So now they are over there, Afghanistan seeing that as some sort violation of privacy sees that as immoral. In the long run America is very likely to win, you know why? You guessed it because America has some numbers to spare.

Through out history in the long run the Majority has always won, a few instances where the minorities played their cards right and came out victorious.

You don't prevent something because it makes a few people angry, that is democracy.
You do prevent something because it is immoral.

This goes for both sides of the arguement.

People don't want gays to get married as they see it as immoral

Gays want gays to get married because they see how they can't is immoral.

Talking in morality is almost pointless as you can easily get both sides of the arguement on leveled ground just by talking morals.

A few hundred years ago there were some immoral laws that people saw as moral, Even today I'm sure there are immoral laws that people see as moral, but we think nothing of it.

Learn to use quote tags.
And no, the argument isn't that gay marriage is immoral, it's that marriage is traditionally a man plus a woman. To argue that homosexuality is immoral is silly, it doesn't hurt anyone.

Homosexuality isn't immoral, the thought of them being married is immoral to some.

However it is immoral in some religions hence starts the argument not about if it is right or wrong, but it will turn political and eventually religous which will fall upon every gay couple and which will most likely continue into a questioning in politics, MORALITY, and his/her religion.

Which is where morality stops for some and Man on Man and women on women marriage is where immorality starts for some.

Copying and pasting is faster than using quotes.

No, saying it is immoral doesn't make it so. You have to explain this viewpoint and why others should take it into consideration. You can say: we are protecting the definition of marriage, because marriage has always been a union between a man and a woman. This argument is fundamentally flawed as I have already explained, I am using it as an example.

Also the quote button.

Homosexuality to me is an abnormality in the primal instinct causing them to crave men.

I believe that they should be allowed to exist in society, and allowed to marry if you they so choose. However, I would refuse them the option of adoption, it merely means an abnormality OR the child may suffer.

You're basically stating that you don't accept them for who they are.

It's not even a fault.. the fact that you guys are calling it one shows some prejudice even if you claim to want equal rights. It's an attribute and it comes with birth, on the same subject, pedophilia is an attribute, they can't help liking children, should we punish them for this?