T/F: Claiming someone else's marriage violates your religion is like getting mad at someone for eating a doughnut while you're on a diet?

That's a poor analogy because it implies that the other person is longing for your doughnut, and they're making a deliberate attempt at self-denial, which may or may not be true. For many religious conservatives it may certainly be true, and this is why this phrase is getting so much play, b ecause it plays off this stereotype for amusing effect. But that's not the real situation.

Claiming someone else's marriage violates your religion is like saying that someone else's religion violates your marriage.

What consenting adults get up to in private is no business of mine, and I'd like to keep it that way. What the state calls marriage is already so far removed from what my religion regards as marriage, who cares if gay couples want to get in on the act. The difficulty comes with definition.

Let's suppose the state or the Supreme Court gradually changed the legal definition of blue to include turquoise and purple. Then one day, they decided that red was also blue. How do you then explain that you want your house painted in what was originally called blue. Why should the 5% of the population who think that red is blue force their views on the other 95%?

True---100% true. Maybe your use of logic will convince some of the fence-sitters on the issue of gay marriage to realize ALL Americans are entitled to equal rights under the U.S. Constitution. If others choose to be rabidly biblical-literalist in their desire to discriminate against same-sex marriage, then maybe the basic psychology principle of "Methinks thou dost protest too much" (latent homosexuality as indicated by unreasonable anti-gay rhetoric) will tone down some of the hate. These latter rightwing extremists might do well to recall other rightwing Republicans who were vehemently anti-gay: former Republican House Speaker Hastert; Republican Senator Larry Craig arrested in an airport men's room for soliciting sex from an undercover male police officer; current Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) who was caught pushing for the death penalty for homosexuals in Uganda---a definite "protest too much" signal!

Your question falls apart unless and until you require, by law, for the schools to teach that donuts belong on everyone's diet, and require all bakers to make donuts to sell regardless, and every citizen to support donuts by buying them, even if you don't eat them.

But even then, yes, it violates my religion. Not surprising if you don't see it though.

Romans Chapter 1

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

True. How does 2 people you don't even know.......marryng in a state 3,000 miles away......affect your religion or your belief in that religion? What business is it of anyone's, what those 2 people choose to commit to. ?

and how can you believe in a religion that actively calls those people defective, and calls them sinners and bans them from Church. ?

I don't recall Jesus ever saying------------"you are all welcome into the Kingdom of Heaven...........except you queers over there".

False.

Claiming that homosexual marriage is compatible with Christianity is like saying that human sacrifice is compatible with values in Western society.

False. Donuts do not raise children or get a financial benefit from being eaten.

And donuts don't feel the need to force people to like them.

If you refuse to eat a donut no one will sue you.

Yes, it is like those who are claiming the confederate flag has nothing to do with racism ,while planning to hold a KKK Rally protesting the removal of the Confederate flag.

F. It would be true, if gays didn't force religious florists and bakers to PARTICIPATE. That where that side is intolerant and discriminatory. Now that gay marriage is legal in all 50 states maybe we can just move on.

That is a false analogy.

~Aizen