In response to:

Gay Marriage at the Ballot Box

Ken the Playful Walrus Wrote: Nov 14, 2012 12:45 PM
Everyone has equal access to marriage, whether or not they want to exercise that access.
Anominus Wrote: Nov 15, 2012 11:03 AM
If sexual preference is not innate, nor immutable, and provides no benefit for society, why does it deserve to be protected?

People are free to love whoever or whatever they want, who's stopping you? Saying you should be able to marry whoever you want is like claiming you have a right to ride your unicycle down the middle of the interstate.
ZealousConscript Wrote: Nov 14, 2012 11:46 PM
Sexual "preference" should be a protected right. That's what we're arguing and fighting and voting for. It's not an imbecile argument. As many studies show, sexual preference isn't a choice, at least not completely. At the absolute minimum it's 50% genetics and 50% early develpment (marty klein, America's war on Sex, an excellent book). So it's not different that race.

But even if it is, why do we get to decide who another person chooses to love? That doesn't sound like 'pursuit of happiness' to me
Anominus Wrote: Nov 14, 2012 3:55 PM
Oh, really? If the arguments are "EXACTLY" the same, then why is it that we find race, sex and religion are protected, while sexual preference is not? Once again, homosexuality cannot be equated to race, and none of your imbecilic "arguments" change that fact.
DCM in FL Wrote: Nov 14, 2012 3:49 PM
No, saying they've been debunked doesn't make it so. But it's so regardless. And why is immutability irrelevant? Why is the fact that race and sexual preference are completely non-analagous irrelevant? The arguments are NOT the same.
DCM in FL Wrote: Nov 14, 2012 2:01 PM
ZC: You are hereby notified that any and all attempts to liken "gay marriage" to interracial marriage have long since been debunked, and that such attempts loudly proclaim the ignorance of the persons making them.
Anominus Wrote: Nov 14, 2012 1:15 PM
Race is innate and immutable, and therefore cannot be equated to sexual preference which is changeable and can only be observed through behavior. It has been proven that interracial couples can still do everything a single race couple does - the same cannot be said of a comparison between homosexual and heterosexual couples.
ZealousConscript Wrote: Nov 14, 2012 12:51 PM
Sigh. By that logic we could still Constitutionally outlaw interracial marriage.

SUPPORTERS OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE have reason to cheer after last week's election. Supporters of democratic self-government, even those of us who oppose gay marriage, do too.

On Nov. 6, for the first time ever, voters in three states – Maine, Maryland, and Washington – redefined marriage by popular vote. In Minnesota, residents said no to a constitutional amendment enshrining the traditional understanding of marriage as the union of a man and a woman. There is no denying the significance of these results: Previously the issue had gone to the ballot in 32 states, and in all 32 same-sex marriage was defeated....