Everyone has read/listened to the actual interviews, right? (If not, links to both are provided below.)
Adhering to the orthodox Christian/historical Western definition of marriage as a religious oath/sacrament between a man, a women, and God does not make one "hateful" or a "bigot". If the actual source interviews are referenced, it's very clear that Dan Cathy is not spouting hate, but rather affirming the definition of marriage that he believes his God has revealed to mankind through the Bible.
As Mr. Cathy even acknowledges, the orthodox Christian definition of marriage is not espoused or "popular with everyone". Many, probably the majority, hold the modern, statist definition of marriage as a government sanctioned relationship for shared tax liability, inheritance rights, medical decision making, low-level eugenic safety-precautions (currently, no cousins marrying, etc.; previously, no interracial couples), and other government-defined provisions.
In his initial interview with the Baptist Press, Mr. Cathy was thankful that "we live in a country where we can share our values". If the last few weeks prove anything it is that we do not live in a country where we, those who espouse the orthodox Christian definition of marriage, can share our values or opinions. If one openly purports to hold the historical Western definition of marriage as the only valid definition, actively seeks to convince others to agree with him or her, or *gasp!* prays that his or her God (a God that one might believe has harshly judged others in the past) is merciful to those who disagree then he or she is a "hateful", "homophobic", "bigot". America does not sound like a place where "we can share our values" to me.
Here's a little suggestion from this radical libertarian: let's drop the whole issue. Government only got involved with the previously private marriage contract when busy-bodies started fretting that some white folk might start marrying black folk; government sanctioned and defined marriage has been trouble ever since. Let's learn from the past, drop government marriage, and return to our private marriage system. Orthodox Christians can keep their religious oaths, sacraments, and the traditional common law marriage contract. Others can define their relationship(s) -- even calling it "marriage" if they want -- as they see fit without having to get approval from others. No one must accept the other's definition of what a marriage is, but both must recognize the verbal and written contracts made between consenting adults. Seems like a sane solution to me.
References:
Baptist Press Interview (Text)
Ken Coleman Show Interview (Audio)
