[goldstategop]

This decision is an offshoot of Lawrence. All laws that constrain homosexual conduct are constitutionally infirm, including laws that ban same sex marriage. If homosexual behavior's legal, you can't argue gays and lesbians have no right to be married like straight sex couples are. Otherwise its bigotry and discrimination. That was what the Massachusetts Supreme Court concluded last year and a California State Superior Judge decided a few months ago. It was simply a matter of time before a federal judge saw it the same way. Again, here we are now.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[Kryptonite]

All laws that constrain homosexual conduct are constitutionally infirm, including laws that ban same sex marriage.

No. Take a step back and think about the finite legal issues in each case. I've been blessed to make a living on this stuff, and I don't care how Lawrence is distorted, one man one woman marriage doesn't "constrain" homosexual conduct. Criminalizing sodomy constrains sodomy, but one man one woman marriage does not prohibit or otherwise constrain sex of any stripe. The government's out of the bedroom, but it's still on that marriage license. That's where the logical hole is and that's exactly where the SCOTUS will finally put an end to all this nonsense if they ever decide to accept a case. While it is frustrating to me that many very bright people are being misled, I am very confident that the legality of this legislation will be confirmed, eventually, by the Supreme Court.