Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet

[Pyrrho]

...

You have worded it for your particular purposes.  Think of it this way:

1. Can a female person marry a man = yes
2. Can a male person marry a man = no.

Here we have a female person allowed to do something a male person in not allowed to do.

3. Can a male person marry a woman = yes
4. Can a female person marry a woman = no

Here we have a male person allowed to do something a female person is not allowed to do.

So we have discrimination.

To use your language:

Now if we posit the question devoid of the discriminatory qualifier the answer must be the same otherwise it violates equal protection clause:

5.  Can a person and woman get married = yes/no (violates equal protection)
6.  Can a person and a man get married = yes/no (violates equal protection)


Edited to add:


Or if you prefer this wording:

7.  Can a person and a person get married = yes/no (violates equal protection)

The organization you propose serves as a way to determine discrimination according to gender, but not according to orientation (as evidenced by the stripping of gender as the qualifier and not of sexual orientation).

Yes.  It is discrimination based on gender.  Since marriage does not require actual sexual activity, it is not, in itself, about sexual orientation.

 Under the example you provide male person and female person are both permitted and prohibited from doing the same thing.

No they are not.  Male persons are prohibited from marrying male persons, but female persons are not prohibited from marrying male persons.  So there is not the same prohibition for both.

Also, female persons are prohibited from marrying female persons, but male persons are not prohibited from marrying female persons.  So, again, there is not the same prohibition for both.

 Which is marry a person of the opposite gender and not marry one of their own gender.  This is not a violation of equal protection in regards to gender (which serves as your qualifier).  Furthermore, when stripping out the qualifier you must strip from all parties not just the first party.

That makes no difference.  Here it is again, with the qualifier specified and then striped from all parties:

1. Can a female person marry a male person = yes
2. Can a male person marry a male person = no.

Here we have a female person allowed to do something a male person in not allowed to do.

3. Can a male person marry a female person = yes
4. Can a female person marry a female person = no

Here we have a male person allowed to do something a female person is not allowed to do.

So we have discrimination.

To use your language:

Now if we posit the question devoid of the discriminatory qualifier the answer must be the same otherwise it violates equal protection clause:

5.  Can a person and a person get married = yes/no (violates equal protection)