[NutCrackerBoy]

An individual's choice of sexual partner is of no concern to the government.

So the result of your restriction is that We The People cannot, through our representatives, make any laws that embody this assumption. The law must treat committed homosexual relationships as of equal value to a man and woman who marry and procreate.

Sorry, it doesn't make sense to me.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"So the result of your restriction is that We The People cannot, through our representatives, make any laws that embody this assumption."

NutBoy, post my entire quote next time.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"An individual's choice of sexual partner is of no concern to the government, as long as they are both consenting adults entering into a non-incestous relationship." -- LG

"So the result of your restriction is that We The People cannot, through our representatives, make any laws that embody this assumption." -- You

Had you posted my entire quote, the fact that I set in place parameters vis a vis the contention that incest was not to be permitted, would have become apparent, and as such, the fact that I do believe that some legal restrictions are called for in this issue would have become crystal clear.

But as far as a question of which citizens get issued marriage licenses by the government and which do not, the decision must be based on existing laws.

As far as I am concerned, being a homosexual is not illegal in this nation, so laws restricting same sex couples from receiving marriage licenses do not have a legal basis.

"The law must treat committed homosexual relationships as of equal value to a man and woman who marry and procreate."

The Law may not draw a difference on citizens based on whether they are homosexual, or heterosexual as there is no legal definition of the term "homosexual", and the moment you create one, you have also created a new "type" of citizen.

It isn't illegal for a homosexual to marry, except if that homosexual wishes to marry another homosexual, and according to SCOTUS, the ability to marry the person of your choice is one of our basic civil rights.

This restriction could not possibly be based on the couple's ability to procreate, as people who are literally on their death beds can be issued marriage licenses, infertile people are not restricted from receiving marriage licenses, and people well beyond the age of procreation are issued marriage licenses.

So, if homosexuality is not a crime, and procreation is not a requirement for obtaining government issued marriage licenses, what reason does the government have to restrict homosexual marriages?

[Luis Gonzalez]

"The law must treat committed homosexual relationships as of equal value to a man and woman who marry and procreate."

Is the law enjoined to treat committed heterosexual relationships of people who do not procreate as of equal value to a man and a woman who do?