Originally Posted by Infinite_Loser

Even though you tried, this argument ignores the fact that some group of men/women had the ability to marry another group of women/men they "loved" (I don't really want to use that word, but I will), respectively, while another group didn't. And unless there was a valid reason for denying the second group the same ability as the first, then the restrictions on the second group must have be inherently discriminatory. Indeed, since those restrictions were based on race-- Which is considered to be a fully protected class under the 14th Amendment-- Then those restrictions were discriminatory and, therefore, unconstitutional.

The entire problem with your argument is that you first assume marriage is a right; that sexuality is a class protected by the Constitution; and by denying gays the ability to enter in same-sex marriages that we're discriminating against gays, when we're not. A heterosexual looking to enter into a same-sex marriage will be denied the ability to do so just as a gay person looking to enter in a same-sex marriage will be denied the ability to do so. Yeah, scoff at that argument as you will, but this fact alone keeps it from being an issue of discrimination.

To claim discrimination, a subset of the population must first be allowed the ability to do something while another subset of the population restricted. If you don't have that to begin with, then there-- By definition and by law-- Cannot be discrimination. Gays aren't disallowed from marrying because they're gay. They're disallowed from entering into same-sex unions because they are not consisting of one man and one woman. And until you realize this, then your argument becomes, essentially, moot because you're arguing something which is simply untrue.