The problem with your argument is that you are arguing that marriage is a constitutional right. It is not.
Depriving someone of marriage, is not the same as treating them as less of a person. No one has the right to get married to whomever they want. Not you. Not me. Nobody.
Positive discrimination is permitted. That the state regulates marriage as one man and one woman isn’t discrimination against those who do not get married. It IS recognition of their bond and provides legal protections encouraging the formation of families and children.
That’s really the core of the argument here. The state has an interest in healthy families, and the best way to get there is through marriage.
Full stop right there.
I have never put that up as an argument and have no clue how that can be derived. Please enlighten me.
I have said "equality under the law". If marriage is defined as being between one male and one female, then all get to partake of it under the law. You don't get to deny someone because they're black or gay or yellow or too short or too fat. They meet the qualifications -- they get it.
You can't deny a homosexual under the law, as it stands with that, but really, would they under those requirements? That's not what they want and its YOUR position.
Care to try again? You guys seem to be inventing a whole lot of things nobody is saying. While amusing, it is very irritating and shows a lack of comprehension on your part. It is also amusing that people on this site are running about bashing people WHO ARE ON THEIR SIDE. Way to go, folks. Any more supporters you want to drive away while you're at it by being stupid?
I have said in the past a good end-run around any legal argument is to send marriage back to the Churches and get the Government out of it.
With THIS Government, which seems to be minting libertarians (small-l) left and right out of both Republicans and Democrats alike, that may end up being the only viable option once they get going.