Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet

[TheRealJoeFish]

I mean, it's almost sounding like, "Computer says no. Even though you and I understand that a minimum age and arbitrary gender restrictions are unrelated, we must entangle them both because that's how the law works." It seems those in the legal battle who are against it are trying to manipulate the law to bring up barriers, so that they don't have to fall back on their stupid bigoted "arguments".

I hope I've done at least a decent job of suggesting that the law, as it currently is, has a clear mechanism for delineating these things: consent.  I think one can at least argue (without making any glaring logical errors) that the two issues (gay marriage/child marriage) may be too closely entangled to separate by using Constitution (rather than with, say, state statutory law), but I simply think that one who makes such an argument is mistaken.

---

And I'm still planning on proceeding to different parts of the oral argument, Anima! (... when I get time!)