I don’t understand the argument against it legally. I know what their problem is, but how do they argue it in court? I can imagine when they get to the Supreme Court and the lawyers for the gay side are like, “Well, your honour, we pay taxes, there’s nothing illegal about what we do, we’re the same as anyone else; why shouldn’t we get the same protection under law as heterosexuals get?”
And then they ask the other lawyer and he says, “Your honour, they’re fucking queer, they’re fucking queer!”
That’s it isn’t it? That’s the whole argument.