Here's a question.
Let's say you have two populations of people: one that believes that sodomy and same-sex marriage is moral, and another that believes sodomy and same-sex marriage is immoral.
The population that believes sodomy/same-sex marriage is moral is such that they can - with little outcry from their community - spawn mass protests of companies whose owners oppose same-sex marriage, fire or attempt to fire people for having given donations in opposition to same-sex marriage even if there were no allegations of wrongdoing on their parts at their job, and generally punish anyone who ever criticizes sodomy or same-sex marriage.
The population that believes sodomy/same-sex marriage is immoral tries to pass laws outlawing same-sex marriage, supports organizations that regard sodomy/same-sex marriage as immoral, and believes it should be legal to refuse to lend one's business services to a same-sex marriage ceremony.
How can someone make the argument that the latter is 'obsessed' with sodomy/same-sex marriage, but that the former isn't?
I say it's not possible. When people say 'you're obsessed' in this case, all it can cash out to is this: 'I think this is very, VERY important. So do you, but I think I'm right and you're wrong, so you should stop talking about it.'
It's like living in a world where people fuck in public on a regular basis, but it's the people who argue that public sex is vulgar that get accused of being obsessed with sex.