Quote from: Ilirix on July 06, 2015, 01:24:01 PM

Quote

My personal preference is women.

So I take it you agree that "preference" is not the same as "choice"? Then I guess we are on the same page after all.

No, I'm just debating you on your home court. I find your use of the distinction a rationalization that (you believe) allows you to hold homosexuals to a different standard, guilt-free.

Quote

Now - why don't you draw the distinction between that and your argument against homosexual marriage.

My argument was against the Court inventing new legal concepts not found in the Constitution.

The Court develops new legal concepts all the time. The Constitution, as written, doesn't come close to covering everything that needs covering without some pretty expansive interpretation.

I think your real problem with this decision is that a few days ago, your preference was the law, and now it's not. You were just fine when the law drew a distinction - based purely in morality and religion - between two otherwise identical individuals.

We used to legally discriminate against blacks, and we used to legally discriminate against women. Looking back, the mistakes are obvious. Don't you see the same kind of mistake here?