I'll be brief: marriage defined conjugally by common and higher law is not for all (pairs of) humans, and never has been. So no one individual is per-se dehuman

I'll be brief: marriage defined conjugally by common and higher law is not for all (pairs of) humans, and never has been. So no one individual is per-se dehumanized by not being able to marry. What's more, as dissenting SCOTUS opinion makes clear, revising marriage without any essentialist basis for defining it means that polygamy should be legal too. Dispute or dodge that, and you are the hater: http://adam4d.com/whos-the-bigot/ http://adam4d.com/whos-the-bigot/ Finally, ad hominem arguments are fallacious on their face, and tiresome. I'm calling out your anonymity to level the playing field between you and me, not among us and http://discussingmarriage.org http://discussingmarriage.org folks, because you keep trying to smear me as "anti-gay" (or now pro spousal rape, or whatever). Argue the facts, not the person.