The thing that interested me the most in recent Prop 8 appeal decision is that the Judge likened the Prop 8 law as being unconstitutional because it went against the Equal Protection clause in the 14th Amendment. His decision on the matter, and his appeal to the 14th amanedment, relate homosexual marriage to other civil issues such as segregation, accesses to education, and denial of voting based on race or gender, as well as denying marriage based race. Is it right to compare homosexual marriage to Jim Crow laws? It is not as if (un)married homosexuals were being forced to sit in the back of the bus. It is not as if (un)married homosexuals were being denied an education.
In Loving v. Virginia (LvV), the court ruled that marriage cannot be denied to people based on race. In some cases it would seem that the case has nothing to do with Prop 8, as homosexuality is not a race like African, Asian, White, or Hispanic. However, it is important in the issues of rights. The presiding Supreme Court Judge of LvV stated in his decision, "Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival." Keeping in mind that with every right there is also a responsibility associated with the right, in this case in order for marriage to be a basic civil right it appears that it needs, in some way, to fundamentally aid in the continual existence and survival of not only the country but also the human species.
Understanding marriage as a right and it being fundamental to existence and survival of humanity, the question becomes, "If marriage looses the fundamental responsibilities that the supreme court gave it in Loving v. Virginia (prolonging existence and survival) through a willful denial due not to medical reason or health problems does marriage stop being a right?"