We have not had a republic for some time.
But here is the point that I think everyone is missing. Homosexuals have the same right to marry someone of the opposite sex as heterosexuals.
How can this be a “denial” of equal protection?
How can this be a “denial” of equal protection?
Bingo!
By the way, the erroneous reasoning by judges on equal protection grounds would and does apply to any activity licensed by the state.
If one prefers to cut hair, the state should not deny cosmetology licenses to those who only have skills to repair automobiles.
The state cannot restrict persons who prefer driving on sidewalks to driving only on paved highways.
The state cannot forbid deer hunting licenses to those who prefer to hunt possums.
And as you point out, homosexuals are in fact NOT treated distinctly from heterosexuals. Homosexuals have identical treatment under the law. The homosexual is forbidden from using his cosmetology license to practice psychiatry and surgery, the homosexual is forbidden from using his squirrel hunting license to hunt muskrats, the homosexual is forbidden to use his driver's license to drive on sidewalks, and the homosexual is forbidden from using a marriage license to marry somebody of the same sex. It is in fact, irrelevant that the license applicant is heterosexual or homosexual.
And, also by the way, the state has NO tests on love when issuing marriage licenses. Love is not a requirement, and it is not tested..... And this is rightly so, for I love my mother, father, daughter, son, neighbor, dog, preacher, teacher, neighbor, and married friend.
And.... Homosexuals have the same contract rights as anybody else. Timmy and Tommy and Tony and Tammy Too can contract to love, cherish, fornicate, and share bank accounts as they desire.