The MRM and Gay rights...

While I wouldn't say the MRM is inclusive (in a way feminism is now) we are getting there (at least I hope so):

It's true that marriage has always been between a man and a woman (or a man and several women). But in the past, it served to enhance human procreation by giving men a greater reason to invest resources in offspring they could be reasonably certain were theirs. That was at a time when expanding the number of human beings in the world was perceived as important by human beings. Now the opposite is true. There are far too many of us for the resources of the planet. Contraception is more important than procreation.

That doesn't mean that marriage isn't important, though. It is vitally important to the children that we choose to have. But I completely fail to understand how granting the right to marry to homosexual men and lesbian women threatens the rights or abilities of the rest of us to marry, and have and raise children. On the contrary, I view changing laws to permit gay and lesbian marriage as an expression of how much we value the institution. We think it's such a good idea that we don't want to prevent anyone from doing it.

And, contrary to what the article cited implies, lesbians and gay men adopt and raise children. I know several of each who've adopted and, although the synergy of male-female parenting styles is largely lost in those couples, are they really worse for children than raising them in foster care or orphanages? That's not a tough one to answer.

[...]It may be that the majority of Americans aren't yet ready to say "I do" to the concept of same-sex marriage. But I suspect that time will come and when it does, I think we'll be better off because of it.

-from Glenn's blog

Child custody disputes involving homosexual couples are becoming increasingly common and are often contentiously litigated. Unlike many groups focusing on LGBT issues, we do not see these disputes as centering on primarily gay/lesbian rights. Instead, we see them as family court issues comparable to those involving disputes between married heterosexual couples where the man is infertile and children are conceived through the recruitment of a sperm donor. Such children are considered the children of the marriage, and are raised by both the mother and father.

When a couple divorces, one parent should not be able to decide that, because he or she is the only biological parent, he or she can drive the ex out of their child’s life. Both parents agreed to have a child together, and they both have a parent-child relationship with their child. The child’s right to a relationship with both parents must be protected.

While F & F does not take any official position on gay marriage or gay rights issues, we do defend the rights of all parents–male or female, biological or adoptive, gay or straight.

Jenkins has for many years been represented in court and in the media by the Boston-based advocacy group Gay & Lesbian Advocate Defenders. GLAD has been very effective, repeatedly winning in court, but the court’s orders have not been effectively enforced. F & F spoke with a GLAD representative today, commended the organization for its good work, and offered our support.

-from Fathers and Families (Father's rights organisation)

[I]f you were born with a penis, you're welcome here
If you're a M>F transvestite or transsexual, you're welcome here
If you'e a F>M transvestite or transsexual, you're welcome here
Gay, straight, or gender-queer, you're welcome here.
If you're a cis-man or cis-woman, you're welcome here.

[...]We're about politics, less so about identity.

-from r/Mensrights (perhaps the largest MR group there is)