No. In fact, it’s only discrimination if we DO try to redefine marriage.
The speaker in this Q & A session – Ryan Anderson of The Heritage Foundation – argues that so long as we define marriage as the permanent, exclusive union of sexually complimentary spouses as husband and wife, potentially father and mother, then ALL people have equal opportunity under the law to enter that institution. The “equal protection” clause of the Constitution is fulfilled.
But if we redefine marriage to mean nothing more than the government endorsement of a romantic relationship, Anderson suggests, allowing only two homosexuals to “marry” inherently becomes discrimination against the romantic union of three or four or more people – what he refers to in this video as a “throuple” (as distinct from a “couple”) or a “quartet.” In other words, to arbitrarily extend marriage only to homosexual couples instantly becomes an act of discrimination against those who prefer other romantic relationships.
The “equal protection” and “discrimination” arguments can only remain consistent, Anderson argues, if we understand marriage has an established definition and people may either participate in that definition or not.
Watch the following video to see how Anderson handled this question from a crowd member: “Why should I, as a gay man, be denied the same right to file a joint tax return with my potential husband that a straight couple has? … How is that not discrimination?”
