A New Jersey judge gives the sensible reasoning against gay marriage. Homosexual activists claim that preventing them from marrying is a violation of the equal protection cluase of the Constitution, by allowing only some people to marry but not others.
However, the NJ judge said that gays are free to marry ... just not each other.
The ruling states: “New Jersey’s marriage statutes are facially neutral; they apply with equal force to all men and all women in the state. Plaintiffs, like anyone else in the state, may receive a marriage license, provided that they meet the statutory criteria for marriage, including an intended spouse of the opposite gender. Plaintiffs are, in that sense, in the same position as all other New Jersey residents. The State makes the same benefit, mixed-gender marriage, available to all individuals on the same basis. Whether or not plaintiffs wish to enter into a mixed-gender marriage is not determinative of the statute’s validity. It is the availability of the right on equal terms, not the equal use of the right that is central to the constitutional analysis. Plaintiffs seek not to lift a barrier to marriage, but to change its very essence. This objective is Legislative in nature and finds no support in the equal protection provisions of the State Constitution.”
That just makes sense, but not to people to whom their preferred means of gaining sexual pleasure is a civil right and trumps all laws and moral codes.