What you're arguing is that homosexuals don't have the right to marry because that right isn't specifically granted in the Constitution
I think the anti-gay marriage crowd's argument is that marriage is by definition between a man and a woman, so gays by definition cannot marry. They can enter into something called a civil union which is similar to, but not the same as, a marriage. If my understanding is correct the whole thing seems to be splitting hairs, but I think that is the anti-gay marriage argument.
Myself, as I wrote earlier, I have nothing against gay marriage, but I'd like to know more about the legal ramifications which would result, if any.
Moreover, the Constitution doesn't guarantee heterosexuals the right to marry, either, yet you still believe they have it, right?
State law passed by democratically elected legislatures gives heterosexuals the legal right to marry. Most states don't grant gays the same legal right, that's what the debate is all about. |
