Men are able to marry women, women can't. Women are able to marry men, men can't. Each sex is able to do something the other cannot do under the law.
Your point?Because you are the same sex of that individual.
Wedding vows are not required to engage in marriage. Nor, technically, is love an absolute requirement under the law.If you don't love them, then when you recite your vows in the solemnization process you are committing fraud on the other person and they can sue you accordingly.
Actually its not. Sex is a middle teir protected entity under the EPC. The "acceptability" of discriminating based on it with regards to marriage is a bit up in the air and is far from "perfectly" acecptable. At most its questionably acceptable.Right, it's gender discrimination, and that's ok. Perfectly acceptable.
Lowest tier of the EPC, not comparable with sex.Anti-incest is familial discrimination
Lowest tier of the EPC with regards to marital status, thus not comparable with sex. Religious discrimination would only come into play if private polygamous marriages were punishable by law. The law is not constitutionally required to change to allow something to become legal simply because your religion says so...IE you can't claim religious discrimination for murdering someone because your religion says its okay. Religious discrimination under the EPC is if the goverment is discriminating specifically against you due to your religion which would not be the case here.anti-polygamy is marital-status/religious discrimination.
That pesky thing called the constitutional potentially cares.So what? So you're being discriminated against....who cares.