Your post is a really good example of why the idea that some views are just unacceptable is so terrible.
You seem to have an extremely one-sided and superficial understanding of some of these controversies.
Many people, including people who are themselves gay, have historically felt that marriage existed mainly as a way to manage the differences in reproductive role with males and females. So to some extent, the framing becomes, it is it ok to have social institutions that recognize biological sex.
That's not stupid or bigoted, it's a serious viewpoint and deciding that we can't has legal repercussions that need to be considered.
The argument around abortion has multiple components. One is about teh woman's relation to her body. The other is about when a human life becomes protected under the law, and when it gains the rights of personhood. And notably, that question is not dependent on the former - that's basic to philosophical thinking around rights issues.
So again, not a simple question, one where either answer seems to open cans of worms, one where there are significant ethical issues at stake on both sides.
The kind of ignorance that says these are obvious questions, which I am sorry to say is often found on the progressive left, especially among the young, is very much related to the assumption that certain ideas are beyond the pale and not worth discussing.