[bigsigh]

I stated my reason why it should happen. Liberty, pursuit of happeness and equal access to government. You have it backwards. The onus is on you to say why the government should restrict these people from marrying whom the chose.

You are using the techicality of public license to say that marriage is public. In any practical sense it is not. And it certainly does not harm anybody else's marriage.

[inquest]

I stated my reason why it should happen. Liberty, pursuit of happeness and equal access to government.

All of which already exist for homosexuals. You refuse to see that there's no inequality where there's no discrimination.

You are using the techicality of public license to say that marriage is public.

Given that this is the very "technicality" that's at the center of the debate, it's hardly insignificant.