Nonsense. Drug use is a behavior, which is discriminated against. You seem to be under the impression that it is illegal to discriminate against a behavior, which simply isn't the case.You seem to be under the impression that its legal to discriminate against behavior, which simply isn't the case.
And there has been no discrimination based on marital status. there has potentially been discrimination based on many other things, but not marital status.Marriage may be a behavior, but its protected under California law with regards to employment.
Of course not, nobody ever said there was. This is primarily because if it is applied to everyone, it ain't discrimination. And that's the point.There is no legal defense for discrimination lawsuits in which you claim "but look we discriminate against everyone so its okay".
That's impossibleMarried and Unmarried are both being discriminated against
Incorrect. The interracial bans are discrimination because the race of the participants engaging in the behavior directly affects whether or not the behavior is prohibited. If both people are black, it doesn't affect them. If both people are white, it doesn't affect them. If one is white and one is black, it suddenly affects them. Thus, it isn't the behavior that is being targeted, it is race.just like both the white and black person are both being discriminated against with interracial bans.
The ban on extramarital sex, however, does NOT discriminate because if both participants are married when they engage in the behavior, it still applies to them, and if both participants are single when they engage in the behavior, it still applies to them. If one is married and the other is single, it applies. No marital status combination exists where the ban is not in effect.
Does it affect single people more than married people? Of course. Just like how a ban on drug use affects the users of drugs more than those who do not use drugs. That is not the issue, though.
They are no different
I just demonstrated how they are different.
So you agree that this isn't discrimination, then, because you don't need to know those things in order to make that determination.If you need to know the persons melanin content, gender or marriage license to make that decision, you are breaking the law.