Insane...
My question to those who believe that equal protection be extended to acting on sexual orientation.
What happens when the DSM-VI declares pedophilia and pederastry as mere ‘orientation’ rather than disorder... As early versions of the DSM-V declared?
Could the writers of the 14th Amendment ever have imagined that the constitution would protect the rights of the 80 year old man with the 8 year old bride? Also, would local non discrimination laws force people to participate either the ceremony or the celebration of such a union?
The lawyers on our side of the debate are absolutely failing if they don’t make this argument... Which is get real. What kind of precedents are we setting?
It is a slippery slope. Once you define marriage as a union of people who “love each other” , it opens the door to anything. Already we’re beginning to hear calls to legalize polygamy. That has more historical precedent than homosexual unions. But, now that we’ve kicked open the door, what’s to stop it.