Butchering of English grammar aside, I'm actually semi-okay with this and here's why: essentially what he is arguing for is to protect a state's ability choose if it wants to allow SSM in the state or not. Mainly because the way the electorate is going anyways, even if said bill was passed, eventually every state will legalize SSM anyways.
Why exactly should any American have to wait for "eventually" to exercise their constitutionally protected right to marry?
And there are serious legal issues raises when you try to extend the 14th amendment to protect legal agreements (which is really what SSM is all about).
It protects marriage. It has for decades.
It opens up the doors for all sorts of other issues like incest and polygamy.
No, it doesn't. Those are completely separate issues. Just like interracial marriage didn't lead to incest, same sex marriage doesn't either.
I'm not saying that loving someone of the same sex is a choice, but to enter into a legal agreement that says such is. See the difference?
And you have no right to deny others the choice to enter into that agreement.
It could be that they are standing up for their sincere belief that marriage is between one man and one woman.
Laws aren't based on beliefs. Constitutional rights aren't stripped from people because of someone's belief.
The reason it wouldn't apply to women or race is because you are judging them based solely on who they, not what their doing.
That is not at all how this body of law works, and the discrimination against gays is entirely about who they are. The same way that keeping black children out of specific schools isn't "what they are doing", keeping gay couples out of marriage isn't. It isn't the driving that's being discriminated against when someone is harassed and arrested for "driving while black."
You feel, and I think many on our side erroneously think so as well, that many of those who oppose SSM do so because they simply hate gays.
A lot of you seem to. The loudest voices in the anti-rights movement express a lot of hatred. Some of the rest of you dress it up in slippery slopes and fallaceous arguments about separation of powers and "the will of the people."
What they fear most is what will happen when you start assigning equal rights to legal arrangements and that's all that marriage (straight or gay) is. Once you start assigning those protections to legal arrangements, then you start to move into the territory where stuff like polygamy can be recognized under the law and offered the same treatment as other marriages.
That is all that marriage is. That's all marriage has ever been. You can assign your marriage whatever other things you want. You can feel that it has religious significance or whatever emotional status you like. That's personal and has nothing to do with the law.
Meanwhile, if you're so afraid of polygamy, make arguments against that, not against same sex marriage.
Because really, the only reason we don't allow Polygamy today is because it's a social taboo, as was SSM for the longest time. Once you remove the taboo, you realize there's nothing to stop extending legal protections to them.
So then why are you so afraid of legal polygamy?
Let me sum this up because I'm not going to go over the same points again:
You have a right to be Gay in the US, you do not have the right to Gay Marriage.
No, you have a right to be gay, and the right to marry. Therefore, you have the right to a same sex marriage.
Strange definition of Liberal. But regardless, honestly the government shouldn't be in the position of defining marriage in the first place.
Then who should? Churches? You do know that many Americans aren't Christians and have no desire to be. All religious institutions? Many Americans aren't religious, and religion has no place in law. So tell me, who defines marriage if not the law?
Again though, it's really not about discriminating gays as it is preventing a slippery slope where other doors are then opened.
Bull. You can repeat this over and over and it will never become true.
Because nobody voted for Republicans, they voted against Democrats.
And because barely anyone showed up to vote at all.
