LiberalSlayer wrote,"Apples and Oranges. The point is what people do in the privacy of their own home SO LONG AS they aren't hurting anyone else, should be NONE of the government's business."
It is not apples and oranges - again you are defining what is right and wrong. Homosexuality is not just a sex act in private - it is the public affirmaation through marriage that is at issue. If your whole argument is that this is only a private affair (a sex act) then you have no argument. Furthtermore, Who defines consensual, you? the court? well we know that can change dont we?
The point Im driving home for you is that homosexual marriage is not a private act. It is the publc affirmation of its legal standing that is at issue. And which stands to de-value the definition of marriage.
I think you're missing my point. That federal government involvement in marriage is unnecessary and unwarranted. As I stated earlier, marriage is a personal and normally religious ceremony. As far as the government is concerned, they need to know (marriage) for citizenship and tax reasons. Yes, I'm aware we're talking semantics here, but if we're talking government, then we're talking all unions are technically civil unions. That is my point.