Evil Republicans For Gay Marriage

I was listening to Mark Bellingham (sp?) while out to lunch and he said something that got me to thinking. He said, and I paraphrase here, that to “legalize” a marriage between same sex couples is to say there is legally no difference between men and women. And I can see where he is coming from. To say that there is no difference between a man marrying a man or a woman marrying a woman than there is between a man and a woman marrying is to say that in the law’s eyes, there is no legal difference between men and women.
 
To remove that distinction in this instance removes it in all instances. You can’t say that a fish is a fish except when it’s a cow. A fish is a fish whether it’s in a lake or on your plate. In the legal sense to say that the fish is a fish in one instance but it’s a cow in another, that doesn’t work. Once you set the bar, the bar must remain the same in all instances. If not, the whole concept of impartiality of the law and the law being “blind” becomes null and void.
 
Let me say up front, I’ve done no research to back up what I’m going to say next, but I would bet that the majority of folks who favor gay marriage consider themselves to be liberal. (I myself neither favor nor oppose gay marriage. I believe that is up to the individuals involved and the state should not be involved in either the sanctioning or vilifying of any unions. As long as it doesn’t lead to someone losing life, liberty or property through force or fraud, it’s none of the government’s business. Oops, sorry for the mini libertarian rant.)
 
I doubt seriously that most of these supporters would like to see the logical extension of removing the legal differences between men and women. Wouldn’t this simple act, by definition, undo decades of laws the liberals have shepherded into being, either by legislation or through judicial fiat?
 
Think about it. If there are no legal differences between men and women, doesn’t that make Title IX superfluous? Schools could choose to have whatever sports they wished to support, regardless of the gender of folks participating. If a school chose to only have football, basketball and track, and only have the best participants on the field, there would be no legal ground for a liberal to stand on to complain that such a move discriminates against women. Since the law says men and women are equal in all ways.
 
If there is no legal difference between men and women, all talk of gender discrimination and the laws relating to it must go away. Since legally there are no differences.
 
Think of all the money businesses could save by only having to provide 1 restroom facility. No need to provide redundant facilities since there are no differences, right?
 
No need to have different sets of qualifying scores on physical fitness exams for such things as law enforcement, fire services, emergency services, the military. There are no legal differences. There is one and only one standard all must equally achieve.
 
The cosmic bunny hole that would be created by legalizing same sex marriages could be all consuming from a liberal perspective. A truly evil conservative might push for legalizing gay marriage merely for the havoc they could wreck upon the liberal agenda once the legal precedent was set that there was no difference between men and women.
 
Or so it would appear to an old farm boy.