One of you will end up here next!
Also today, if you listened, the litigants admitted that CA already had laws such that same-sex civil unions had every benefit as a married couple. Except calling it a "marriage", and that the basis of their argument was that this "stigmatized" the civil union folks.
Really, SCOTUS justification is whatever they say it is.
Some people, I don't know if this includes you, however view this as acceptable because if God forbid a male Soldier sees his husband in hospital or even on his deathbed then some how that will undermine the meaning of my marriage or the already trashed institution of it.
Is that equal protection under the law? Is it equal protection that a man who in every aspect of his life treats another man as his spouse be denied the same rights and privileges as a man who treats a woman as his spouse?
What possible reason is there to not allow this, what do we as a society or as individuals gain from denying it? What benefit is there? Is it just because it makes some people uncomfortable because its against their personal values? Is that reason enough to deny someone all these privileges enjoyed by hetero couples? And what if the shoe was on the other foot, and someone was trying to take away something important to you because it was against their values? Would you still feel the same since they were in the majority?
Yes there is.All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.