What was the reasoning behind the decision? The 14th Amendment.
Well, to which I respond, where is there a Constitutional right to marry who or whatever you want in the US Constitution? Well....I'm waiting....
Stumped Again provides a thumbnail definition of what marriage has long been intended as:
I can’t think of anything more ordinary and common than the 1976 edition of The World Book Encyclopedia which sits a-mouldering on a sagging shelf in my basement. Smack in the middle lies the thickest volume, heavy with knowledge and wisdom, and simply entitled “M.“ It plainly reads:Until today, because the activist judiciary is too busy cowering to a loud liberal minority who demand their way, regardless if it is against the will of the people.
“People everywhere feel that the regulations of marriage are necessary to protect women and children and maintain the stability of the community.”
So there you have it. The purposes of marriage are:
–The protection of women,
–Which fosters the protection of children,
–Which, in turn, fosters the stability of civilization.
Speaking of which, if we want to use the "due process of law" argument, what about throwing out the votes of 52 percent of Californians who had their votes nullified by some liberal activist judge? Where is their due process?