Way to highlight the insane worldview behind this ruling. How now can Connecticut rule anything is not a marriage? Two women, three women, that’s just an orientation, man! A sibling? A dog? A leather sofa? Hey, it’s a sexual orientation! You can’t discriminate.

Nobody ever made the claim that the marriage between a black person and white person was not a marriage; they simply said it was improper because of race. What gays are attempting is not a breaking down of social barriers, but a complete redefinition of a social institution that has existed since the dawn of time.

By the way, the Supreme Court’s overturning of miscegenation laws was also an unconstitutional exercise of raw judicial power. Just because you like the outcome, doesn’t mean it’s proper. Tyranny always begins with illegal measures that the majority finds acceptable; it’s only later that the overweening power of government becomes odious even to the majority, but by then it’s too late.

There is no difference between blacks and whites. There are big differences between men and women and big differences between a man-woman union and a man-man relationship.

Man-woman unions are INHERENTLY beneficial to society in a way that NO OTHER RELATIONSHIP can possibly be. That is why the state has an interest in recognizing these relationships. There is no state interest in recognizing any other relationship as a “marriage.”

Marriage laws treat every person equally — any non-married, majority-aged person has the same exact access to the same exact pool of non-cosanguine Americans. The violation of equal protection in VA’s anti-miscegenation was what Loving addressed. What the SC of CT did was invent a brand new definition of marriage based on nothing but the desire to further the agenda of a wealth-drenched, pandered-to political movement. Equating this with the civil rights movement is insulting propaganda.

I don’t know what your unsourced public opinion poll references have to do with anything.