It is Constitutional to treat different actions and different kinds of associations differently. State marriage licenses that require the participation of both a bride (woman) and a groom (man) are inclusive and are equally accessible to individuals regardless of their sex or sexual orientation, and thus are not unconstitutional. Remember that adult relationships with unrelated people are voluntary, and that someone not wanting a license under the required conditions is still offered access to them.
The uniting of a man and woman is the only kind or type of relationship that will naturally create the next generation of citizens, even if not all do. Those new citizens are subjected to this reltionship whether they like it or not. The state has more interest in protecting children than consenting adults. The state simply does not have the same interest in a relationship that 1) does not include both sexes that comprise all of society and 2) will never naturally or as efficiently create the next generation of citizens.
Here's another illustration that might help:
Marriage neutering advocates don't want there to be a word that describes the bride+groom relationship. Requiring both a man and a woman participate is marriage equality. Here's a simple way to explain the concept to someone:
Finally, while one need not disapprove of homosexual behavior or demonstrate that parenting by a homosexual couple harms children in order to effectively defend the bride+groom requirement in marriage licensing, I found this interesting:
The Regnerus study supports gender-inclusive parenting.
Here's another illustration that might help:
Marriage neutering advocates don't want there to be a word that describes the bride+groom relationship. Requiring both a man and a woman participate is marriage equality. Here's a simple way to explain the concept to someone:
Finally, while one need not disapprove of homosexual behavior or demonstrate that parenting by a homosexual couple harms children in order to effectively defend the bride+groom requirement in marriage licensing, I found this interesting:
The Regnerus study supports gender-inclusive parenting.
Love this sandwich puzzler. Here's the perfect solution:
ReplyDelete1) put two of the slices of bread with peanut butter together, making a peanut butter sandwich.
2) put two of the slices of bread together, making a jelly sandwich.
3) put the remaining two slices together, making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.
All three clearly have have equal claim the the label "sandwich". Sure, they're not identical. But they needn't be identical to be equal. Peanut butter and jelly might suit the majority, but what about folks who - through no fault of their own - cannot consume peanuts? Or whose blood sugar would spike dangerously if they ate jelly? Offering more than one variety of sandwich means there's something for them as well. And isn't that a good thing?
Peanut butter does no equal jelly, nor does a peanut butter sandwich equal a PBJ or jelly sandwich. All three are fine to eat, or someone might not want to eat any of them, but they're not equal.
Delete