I read that there is a chance that the issue may soon work its way to the Supreme Court. I know we have discussed this before, but I am interested in this from a strictly legal point of view. If any of you are lawyers, I would be particularly interested in what you have to say.

I have no stake in the outcome, but taking as neutral a position as possible, I just don’t see any legal angle to prevent same sex couples from enjoying the same legal rights as heterosexual couples. I know Scalia and Thomas would never vote for it. I am curious to see what arguments they can come up with to support their viewpoint.

Here are some of the arguments that I have heard, none of which pass legal muster.

Homosexuality is immoral. Well, not everyone feels that way. Those who do are entitled to their opinion, but you can’t legislate morality. You are going to have to explain to me how there can be victimless crimes.

It is unnatural. Firstly, what things are natural? I could argue that flying in an airplane is unnatural. If God wanted us to fly, he would have given us wings. Secondly, it is in fact natural. Homosexuality has existed in all places and at all times, even if not practiced by the majority. There are cases of homosexuality among other species as well.

It will destroy the institution of marriage. How so? I don’t see how extending the number of people who can make a commitment to each other can possibly do any harm to marriage. I have yet to hear anyone give the specifics for this argument.

Have I missed anything?