Plus, we don't ban infertile couples from marriage, and that takes reproduction off the table too. Reproduction is a red herring. The real question is equal protection.
One of you will end up here next!
One such weakness are people who think Loving is some kind of trump card. It's not. It really is not. Loving will help, but Loving won't save the day. Only the merits specific to SSM will win the day, and those merits are contained in the 'family' argument pro-SSM hate to make. The favored 'sexual choice' arguments never win in court. If SSM fails before SCOTUS it will be because pro-SSM pushed the 'sexual choice' arguments over the 'family' arguments.
Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55%
The idea that the "great majority of Americans" oppose SSM is laughably false.
The chance of the SCOTUS ruling against SSM is approximately zero.
Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.
equal protection is equal protection. SSM bans just happen to have multiple angles to attack from on constitutional grounds, including yes family stability, sexual/romantic attraction, 2nd class status, legal rights. If it were for family only then only same sex couples with kids could marry, and hetero couples without kids could not
Only reason i respond at all is 90% of his post uses the argues exactly the same as most on the far right, so i'm debating all of them instead