He won't say it in those words, but he already admits that he does. The same logic that he extends would extend to polyamory, polygamy and a host of other perversions.
Hey Tpaine, here is one for you, you say "Consenting adult". What exactly should the age of consent be? Be specific in your definition please. For example, should there be a magic cutoff age (18), or something else? Please give justification on why you set your age at whatever level you do.
Libertarians have no problems with judicial activist decisions like Lawrence, Roe, and other's provided it's their atheistic worldview that is legislated.
Another perfect example would be the fact that Libertarians are wholeheartly in favor of redefining the institution of marriage.
They swoon over the idea of letting a Federal Court, Federalize an area that has ALWAYS been the sole authority of the individual States. They have no problem running roughshod over the rights of a supermajority of people in States like Alabama, Mississippi, North Carolina, Ect... Just to support an extremly radical superminority, who most likely suffers from some sort of mental illness.
Under no circumstances can the Constitution or any of it's amendments be read to allow the redefinition of marriage nationwide. It's solely left up to the individual states.
Yes, that does mean that States like MA can make whatever mockery of marriage that they want, however, it also means that normal folks in normal states can defend marriage and protect it in their law and Constitutions.
Yet Libertarians support the homosexual mafia's attempt to invent a new right and destroy the institution of marriage.
Which goes back to the political systems grid. Libertarians are in the same box as Democrat Liberals on that issue.
Here is an example of a libertarian who opposes the redefinition of marriage:
http://www.calicocat.com/gay_marriage.htm