[In veno, veritas]

On Myth 2, it assumes that there is a right to marriage. This is simply not true; I cannot marry a close relative, nor can I marry someone who isn't willing to become married to me. I can't marry a 5-year-old, nor an animal of any kind, or figment of my imagination. There are so many restrictions on marriage, same sex marriage is hardly a basic rights issue.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

It’s also a redefinition. How about I call my computer a gun and say, “The right to own computer-guns cannot be infringed.”

Or instead of a computer, I call an alias a gun. “The right to own an alias-gun cannot be infringed.”

[DuncanWaring]

There has never been a “right” to marry; historically, marriage was intended to be an obligation undertaken by a couple prior to engaging in behavior which could reasonably be expected to yield children.

Hasn’t always worked out that way, any more than any other obligation, but that doesn’t transform it into a “right”.

[Albion Wilde]

On Myth 2, it assumes that there is a right to marriage.

During our nation's most radical judicial era before this one, the post-Roe years of the 70s, our courts made many decisions equating any distinction between the married and the unmarried as egregious "discrimination." They also upheld the right to marry of persons who were clearly unfit, such as a man who had abandoned two sets of children by previous marriages and then was turned down for a new marriage license in his state, where the taxpayers were supporting his abandoned children. The case went all the way to the Supreme Court, which ruled that his "right" to marry trumped his personal irresponsibility. I wish I could remember the name of the case, and can look it up if anyone has their panties in a wad over it; I cited it a dozen years ago in my grad thesis.