this one's for the anti-choice (who prefer to be known as "pro-life") and anti-homosexual (who prefer to be known as "defense of marriage") folk. i've had it with twisted reasoning. please, using logic and consitutional reasoning, explain the following:
1. how the state has an interest in regulating a person's body and what they may or may not do with it.
2. how the state has an interest in regulating which consenting adults may or may not enter into a legal contract with each other.
arguments that refer to "tradition" or religious/personal belief are unacceptable. i'm waiting to hear rational, non-religious defenses of your positions. for part 2, feel free to give examples of how a homosexual couple engaging in the legal contract known as marriage in any way undermines the position of a heterosexual couple entered into a similar contract.
to be honest, i don't think you can. but i'm waiting to hear what you come up with.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
