1.) Yes, I am claiming that SSM is a fundamental right, but plural marriage is not. I don't think I can be any clearer on this issue.<quoted text>
But he didn't fully address the question. He simply offered an answer in support of SSM, and stated multiple marriages raises questions. Not once did he say it shouldn't be legal. So again, if marriage is a fundamental right, what state restrictions could ever exist? It seems he, and you are claiming that SSM is a "fundamental right", but plural marriage isn't.
Why do you call polygamy a "scare tactic"? Is SSM such a secular sacred cow that it must be legalized? Why does it matter to you, or any other SSM advocate, if polygamy is legalized? Seems rather hypocritical of you to proclaim that the sole legal definition of marriage as a monogamous union of husband and wife should be discarded to accommodate your version of marriage but no one else.
A few questions. Does any state require a statement of orientation prior to issuance of a marriage license? Does any state prohibit "mixed orientation" marriages? Does any state prohibit a person from marrying outside their self stated sexual orientation?
2.) It might SEEM hypocritical for me to support SSM but not polygamy, but then again, I don't care how I SEEM to you. These are my personal beliefs. You are free to disagree all you want.
3.) As to your last three questions; no, no, and no.