Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet

[Cato]

Anima,

I think you're misrepresenting Bray as it would pertain to existing laws prohibiting same sex marriage. The decision hinged on the fact that there are reasons to oppose abortion other than derogation of the protected class; in this case women. I think the legal reasoning you're employing would be sound in the same sex marriage case if the state laws only allowed marriage to couples with the potential to procreate (keeping the stated state interest in mind). If the laws were structured in that manner then the inclusivity and burden of enforcement considerations you mentioned would be valid, my disagreement with such laws notwithstanding.

The laws prohibiting same sex marriage were enacted specifically to exclude a specific class of people from marriage. The well worn 'for the children' rationalization becomes all too clear when you consider the second sentence of the Ohio amendment (the first being defining marriage between one man and one woman):

This state and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage.

Claims that this law is not invidiously discriminatory simply fall flat.