Wendy,
I was responding to your post, which was in turn responding to Anubis's post. Anubis cannot enact legislation, she can only vote for legislators who will enact laws which she agrees with. That is why I placed the emphasis on our vote. Our vote determines the legislators, who then enact the laws.
Anyway, I agree with you that there need to be protections; it is not a straight majority rule in that the majority cannot vote to violate the rights of the minority. Where you and I disagree is in the definition of a "right". I disagree that we have a "right" to marry anyone we want - as demonstrated by the four exceptions enumerated in my original post. Within these guidelines, we can marry whomever we chose. But we do not have the right to marry a minor, a close relative, a person who is already legally married, or a person of the same sex.
Members of NAMBLA may argue that their "right" to marry minors is being violated. Members of the splinter sect of Mormonism may argue that their "right" to marry multiple partners is being violated. Gays may argue that their "right" to marry someone of the same sex is being violated. All three groups can claim that they are unfairly burdened by these restrictions, as other members of society have no desire to marry a child, have multiple partners, or marry members of the same sex. I can only respond that the laws are applicable to all.
Do you really believe that there are differences between the races comparable to the difference between the sexes? I already mentioned the book "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus." Can you explain to me what the innate difference between blacks and whites might be?
