We’ve got lots of opinions here, and lots of them make great sense. I’d like to address the OP premise that the Christian Conservatives so against same-sex marriage are ”...pro-strict interpretation of the Bible…” I do not think that’s true. A more accurate statement would be that like their supposed support of strict interpretation of the Constitution, they strictly limit what parts they wish to read, and which they prefer to ignore.
They very much like Leviticus 20:13, which says “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” Being as they personally have no interest in lying with a man as with a woman, this one’s a piece of cake to support—and cram down the throats of people who feel otherwise.
They don’t so much like:
Leviticus 11: 4 Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: [as] the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he [is] unclean unto you.
5 And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he [is] unclean unto you.
6 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he [is] unclean unto you.
7 And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he [is] unclean to you.
8 Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they [are] unclean to you.
9 These shall ye eat of all that [are] in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.
10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which [is] in the waters, they [shall be] an abomination unto you:
11 They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.
12 Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that [shall be] an abomination unto you.
13 And these [are they which] ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they [are] an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray,
14 And the vulture, and the kite after his kind;
15 Every raven after his kind;
16 And the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind,
17 And the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl,
18 And the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle,
19 And the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat.
20 All fowls that creep, going upon [all] four, [shall be] an abomination unto you.
So eating bacon, or having a ham sandwich, or going to Red Lobster all all abominations. They all call for being stoned to death.
Forget that God said in Genisis 9:3–4: “Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant. Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.
God changed his mind, I guess.
Moreover, Christian “strict interpretationists” don’t like the prohibitions against wearing mixed fibers, or planting mixed seeds. These too are abominations worthy of stoning to death under the Law. But these “strict interpretationists” like to wear cotton polyester Permapress and eat at Red Lobster.
They aren’t too keen on Jesus’ admonition to care for the poor, either. They’re much more into building mega-churches and massive off-shore bank accounts, and blessing all others who do so.
OK, that’s my rant about that. The reeking hypocrisy of it really annoys me, because while these Bible thumpers seek to destroy other people’s lives for being a little different from them, they seem to be completely clueless about what the book they base all their judgementalism on actually says.