Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
Aha, now I see what you're driving at. So you disagree with the Supreme Court in Zablocki v Redhail, Turner v Safley, and Loving V. Virginia when it held that marriage was a fundamental right?The overturn of Prop. 22 was an example of Judicial overreach. It promoted gay marriage as a right. It is not a right. To be a right, it would have to pass through a majoritarian process. Judges are not empowered to create rights.
When everyone misunderstands you, the problem is probably in the post.Different exchanges have a life of their own. They move in different directions. If there is something you don't understand, then you should ask.
Are you trying to goad me? Do you have any idea how offensive this is? No wonder everyone is calling you a duck--it has to do with the way you walk and talk.I'm opposed to gay marriage. I don't think the state need endorse or sanction sexual fetishes. I think the government should be neutral on such.
Earlier, you tried to say that when you used the term "sexual fetish," you weren't talking about marriage, and here you equate the two.
You're entitled to your personal bizarre views on human sexuality, but they neither have nor should have any relevance to a national discussion of same-sex marriage.
I'm opposed to anti-gay bigotry. I don't think the state need endorse or sanction sexual fetishes.
Homosexuality is no more a fetish than is your anti-gay bigotry.
Same-sex marriage is no more a sexual fetish than is mixed-race marriage.