Quote:
Originally Posted by Infinite_Loser
Wrong. They're arbitrary laws with arbitrary numbers. The rationale for having such restrictions are that people under said ages aren't mature enough to make responsible choices. That entire premise is false, but I'm not going to go off on a wild tangent. You want to scream discrimination based on sexual orientation? There's mild discrimination against people of age, mental prowess, national origin etc. Point being, all groups aren't treated equally. Therefore, before you pull the "We're not being treated equally!" card, you might want to rethink that stance.
|
I do have some sympathy for this argument. I live in a household with a teenager who
can maturely handle the use of alcohol, and a middle-aged man who
can't. To some degree, I agree that it's arbitrary.
But not completely.
The vast majority of ten-year-olds should not legally have access to alcohol. The vast majority of thirty-year-olds should. Within those brackets, there is surely a great amount of variation - responsible 15-year-olds and irresponsible 25-year-olds alike - but the government is not equipped to deal accurately with such variation. We go with an arbitrary standard because it's better than no standard and infinitely more feasible than a precisely justified standard. An arbitrary line can have a reasoned purpose.
But I don't see a reasoned purpose with a line that excludes gay marriage.
In either case, "We're not being treated equally!" deserves a good response.