Analogies show similarities between dissimilar issues. In this case, there are obvious differences: race is who you are, genetically, although this is fuzzy, and sexual orientation is the attraction you feel, expressed through behavior. But there are a bunch of similarities.
Neither is chosen
There appears to be some degree of inheritance for both
Both inspire feelings of "other" and conflict
Both may be hidden to varying degrees
Both have been subject to discrimination
Both are secondary characteristics--they don't change the way you do Seisan, or the way you feel about your significant other
I remember reading a piece called "Passing for white, passing for black" in anthropology, and thinking, this is exactly my experience. The author had vague ethnic features and she would be considered black by blacks but mistaken for white and even told racist jokes by whites. Should she laugh along at the job interview? Should she fail to disclose when asked about home life? Should she try to "talk more black?" Would people think she had a weird motivation if she "came out?" I couldn't have described my experience as a mistaken for straight person with any more clarity.
As for my "news item," the stories go:
There is an institution traditionally engaged in by heterosexuals that nonheterosexuals want to share in as well. The nonheterosexuals have the ability to get the institution perfectly--loving, caring, long term, child rearing, even church going unions. They do it better than some heterosexuals who get divorced a dozen times or marry like Britney Spears or who abuse the kids or you name it. The heterosexuals often think they can have something separate but equal or nearly so, and don't want their institution extended to cover the nonheterosexuals. It's a debate whether that is "tradition" or homophobia.
There is an institution traditionally engaged in by Asians that nonasians want to share in as well. The nonasians have the ability to get the institution perfectly--dedicated, expert, long term mastery of martial arts. They do it better than some Asians who use the titles too freely or for politics rather than skills. The asians often think they can do the martial arts and call their titles something else with the same implications, and don't want their titles extended to non-Asians. It's a debate whether that is "tradition" or racism.*
The situations aren't identical but they seem analogous to me. If they aren't, at least I'm fairly certain you know what it feels like for someone to challenge your access to an institution you value because of a characteristic you deem irrelevant to the tasks at hand. And certainly I can do the things we expect of married couples. A lot better than a lot of marriage candidates or married people have done themselves. Certainly there seems to be no, or at minimum no compelling,
state justification for restricting marriage to opposite sex couples, whereas if we really cared about religious histories, child rearing, or stability we would have religious tests for eligibility, require proof of fertility / child planning or adoption plans, and seriously restrict divorce.
*Disclaimer: I know of not one Asian on earth who actually feels this way, personally; it's a hypothetical example.
I was going to link the following piece as an example of how a largely Catholic nation can get past these issues, but it's not that interesting. Instead, take a peek at the graph at "residency issues" showing a world map of gay policies by color coded country. Is this company we want to keep?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_Spain