[bigsigh]

there are several meanings to public. I don't feel as if I'm endorsing anybody's marriage. Unless I hang out at city hall or read the bridal pages of the local rsag, I don't know who got married. That's the public sense I am expressing.

If the government bestows benefits or provide programs based upon marital status, then they must provide equal access to those benefits. That is not legitimate discrimination. When you vote that homos cannot marry, you are denying them the pursuit of the same happeness you yourself pursued. Those things should not be subject to popular vote. They are inherent.

[inquest]

If the government bestows benefits or provide programs based upon marital status, then they must provide equal access to those benefits. That is not legitimate discrimination.

Like I said, there is no discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. No one's sexual orientation is taken into account at all in determining who does and does not receive benefits. The fact that not all laws and government policies aren't equally convenient to all does not mean there's discrimination. Very few of them, in fact, do affect everyone equally, because everyone's different.

[Eaker]

When you vote that homos cannot marry, you are denying them the pursuit of the same happeness you yourself pursued.

When you vote that murderers cannot commit murder, you are denying them the pursuit of the same happeness(sic) you yourself pursued.