You do not understand, - you could vote against it, and still understand the law. What is silly is not understanding the steps involved- and your post made it clear you did not understand the steps. 1. the finding of discrimination 2. do we have a protected class- and thus strict scrutiny, or do we have no protected class and thus minimal scrutiny and finally 3. is there an overwhelming state interest in the discrimination (making your Nambla case ridiculous because of prongs two and three).
You could have said about miscegenation laws exactly what you have said about gay marriage. "In any event, this is a lost cause. The President opposes it, the Republicans oppose it, the Democrats are distancing themselves from it, many [blacks] (no doubt a majority) do not want it pushed, and 60 percent of the population in the polls oppose it." My change in the brackets- so you can think about it.
That something is popular, and that it is supported by people who cater to the popular will, does not mean it comports with the constitution, or the ideals therein, or that it is "good". Whether gay marriage happens or not, the issue is still one of what promotes the greatest freedom for all, imo, and what discrimination do we want to justify, and fight to the bitter end to justify. Polls are meaningless when it comes to freedom- most people have no idea what the constitution or the bill of rights says, and even people who are educated, as you are, have no idea what constitutional law really is, and though they may know a few case results, they do not understand the reasoning behind the results- and it is the reasoning that is important.
I'm not holding my breath. Discrimination, even that discrimination which it is worthy to outgrow, takes a long time to outgrow- most people who watch these cases know that. |
