If you can't allow debate, you're as fascist as the worst.
I tend not to think there is much of a debate to be had about the situation in occupied Palestine but ok.
But your edit opens up an interesting conversation. I know very well you were talking about social vews. I critiqued that by saying that LGBTQI+ rights and women's rights in Israel occupied Palestine is a lot more nuanced than what you are implying.
As I mentionned, basic rights such as marriage equality does not exist in Israel. Further, under the current Likud government, a very large influence by the Israeli religious far-right has erroded the existing rights, especially those of women. It matters little what the law says, when the state in Israel, as a colonizing state, extends far beyond the state itself, and there is a large degree of self-governance / indirect pressure from civil society groups in many areas of Israeli society, especially in the illegal settlements. There you will see that LGBTQI+ people and women have dismall conditions of life. These settlements are state sanctionned and can do whatever the fuck they want. Abortion rights in these settlements simply do not exist.
Its also very important to realize that the few rights Israel gets to boast about are not there because of how progressive the country is or whatever. They are there for propaganda reasons: we queer people call that "Pinkwashing". It's an active justification for the continuation of the occupation and colonization of Palestine, and to draw in Western support.
Ok, so that's the part about Israel's supposed social progressiveness.
The question of why Queer communists and anarchists opposed (note the past tense) equal marriage is a totally different subject. To make it short, this position is fundamentally rooted in a feminist analysis of queer's situation within capitalist patriarchy. The central opposition was two fold: 1) Radical queers opposed marriage as a be all end all strategy for "liberation" which was championed by centrists and pro-capitalist forces within the LGBTQI+ movement. 2) it was opposed due to the role of marriage itself, as an institution, within patriarchy and capitalism.
It should also be noted that prior to the 90s/2000s, queer movements were feminist and fundamentally anti-capitalist. For our elders, that meant that our emancipation could only occur with the total erradication of patriarchy and how it is used in capitalism. They were right: capitalism will not and does not emancipate nor liberate us, it just allows for a small subsection of our community to leave like straight petit-bourgeois people: like consumer and reproductive familial unit.
Now obviously no one in that queer communist/anarchist current thinks that marriage equality needs to be destroyed or whatever. The idea is just that it was a misguided petit-bourgeois legalistic push in a given moment of our struggle, which has sold the dream that we will be given true equality and liberty just by having it. Obviously marriage equality is a good thing all things considered, but in the larger picture, it does nothing for queer liberation.
For more on that I'd recommend reading stuff by Queer Communsits, Mario Mieli has good stuff about that. You can also read these (1, 2, 3) texts by Jules Joannes Gleeson, a trans communist writer