Prop 8 Unconstitutional

Chief Judge Vaughn Walker of the Norther District of California declared in a 136-page decision that California's Propisition 8, which attempted to ban Gay Marriage, is Unconstitutional. The Prop 8 issue is one of the most fascinating and polarizing issue of our time and nobody thinks Judge Walker's decision is the end of it.

This issue will surely be appealed beyond the notoriously liberal 9th circuit all the way to the Supreme Court. There, the show down will reach its culmination, and we will see if the Constitution's last line of defense will allow what this picture is illustrating to happen.Or, will they think that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is not unconstitutional. I explain my idea of why it might not be after the jump.

My premise to this discussion is this: our society allows segregation based on sex. Men and Women have separate bathroom facilities. It is perfectly legal for any insitution, public or private, to forbid men from entering a women's restroom and vica versa. Why is this? Well undoubtably, it's because Men and Woman are obviously different (but equal), and the need to use a restroom without the presence of the opposite sex is obviously understandable.

I would argue this: since there are separate facilities for men and woman to use the toilet because doing so is understandably intimate and private, there should be separate facilities for homosexuals and heterosexuals. This is not because we are not all equal, it is because we are all equal. I would feel uncomfortable using the restroom in front a woman and a homosexual men, and if the two are truly equal, then the law should recognize the legitimacy of segregating both from heterosexual men (with respect to restrooms) or the law should find both instances of segregation illegitimate. What do you think of that?