But as you and I both know, it's not our judgement that this is ultimately about. And what people did behind closed doors was never the issue. It's gays wanting official recognition for their relationships by the government, which often means those morally opposed to it are forced to recognize it as well. Contrary to the oft-used argument by gay marriage supporters of , "How does it affect you?," we've seen many examples of how it does. It's our government giving an official stamp of approval on relationships that are neither equal or the same as heterosexual relationships. It's our government saying that gender does not matter and that the sexes are interchangable. That it makes no difference whatsoever if a child is raised by a mother and father or by two men or two women. Perhaps most of all, it's the secular segment of society, who want a post-Biblical, Judeo-Christian country, using corrupt and designing lawyers and judges to overrule the will of the majority of the people who are not in favor of gay marriage.

And, as I've pointed out before, the only reason secular liberals who support gay marriage now have to also say they wouldn't be opposed to things such as polygamy is so they don't appear inconsistent. Guaranteed, if gay marriage was not an issue, those liberals (including the ones on this board) would come out with all sorts of arguments against legalizing polygamy; despite the freedom of religion grounds for it. But they know they can't do that now. So it really isn't about "equal protection under the law" for them. It never was. Like the judges and lawyers who have supported this, they simply twist the Constitution to suit their own agenda.