Originally posted by Sandman333:It's irrelevant because you can easily pick any 2 unrelated issues and say the same % of people feel one way or the other about them. You could pick slavery and something else, and they would still be completely irrelvant though they might both be thought of as rights.
I don't speak for the author, of course, but I see the relevance as this:
1) Both examples pertain to the question of who we can marry
2) Both examples begin with a definition of marriage that was contrary to the values of the majority.
3) Both examples pertain to a minority group desiring protection of their rights from the majority.
4)The concept of universal application of laws and rights was the determining factor that saw the resolution enacted by constitutional amendment; which, IMO, is the basis for today's argument by those who believe that people should be protected against discrimination on the basis of their sexual orientation.
