They called Reagan supporters dimwitted hicks back in the day too.

It is not the same as inter-racial marriage. Race is fundamentally different than sex/gender. It

doesn't matter whether you're black, white, brown, yellow, polka-dotted, etc., the fact is there are

no real, inherent differences between races of human being. Men and women, on the other hand,

are inherently different. Marriage describes a very specific thing. It is a complimentary union

between two opposites. Gender/sex is what makes "marriage" marriage. A union between two

men or two women may be "something", but it's certainly not really "marriage". No matter what

bunch of silly people preening around in wizard's robes say. The comparison with inter-racial

marriage is a false one.

The "equality" argument is a bunch of horse shít too. Law, including “marriage law”, always

DID treat all people equally. However, it didn’t treat every behavior that people desired to

engage in “equally”. That’s why the “equality” argument about homosexual “marriage” is

ultimately bullshít. The law discriminates because it needs to - law needs to be “precise”.

Marriage (a union between one man and one woman), polygamous relationships, incestuous

relationships and homosexual relationships are very different behaviors, different things. The law

(in most Western tradition including America) said those last three aren’t “marriage”, aren’t

“unions” that are legally recognized as “marriage”. (Well, it used to, before 5 nincompoops

decided to overturn centuries of human wisdom and impose the preposterous notion of

homosexual "marriage" upon the land). However, what's important to note is that all citizens

(including homosexuals) of America were still “equal before the law” in that they could all

participate in the institution of marriage (as a union of one man and one woman). Something else

has certainly been created by the supreme court jesters, but it's not "marriage". Calling it

marriage is nothing but a ridiculous semantic joke.