Ban on Gay Marriages can be seen as even more cruel and unfair than the ban on Interracial Marriages:

The traditionalist right claims that race and sexuality are different in that race involves a wholly unchosen and unchangeable characteristic whereas sexuality involves at least some sort of behavior and choice. There is some truth in this; an honest perspective would hold that one’s sexual orientation is unchosen and unchangeable (similar to the way race is), but how one ACTS on that orientation does put us in the realm of choice. Someone who is homosexually oriented can always do his best to refrain from any such activity and struggle with living a celibate lifestyle (or God forbid, get married and attempt a heterosexual lifestyle—but any honest person should realize that this is simply a recipe for disaster).

Yet, comparing “sexuality” with “race” is NOT the same as comparing same-sex couplings with interracial couplings. There is a subtle but meaningful difference. Just as sexuality involves some element of choice, so too do interracial couplings. When two people of mixed races are involved in a relationship or a marriage, this involves choice and behavior. After all individuals can always choose to pursue sexual and romantic relationships with members of their own race only. And every time the sexual act between individuals of different races is done, a choice is being made.

Seen in this respect, interracial couplings involve far more of a choice than same-sex ones. Sure some individuals, by no fault of their own, may find themselves in love with members of a different race. Or, many may have some sort of predilection or preference for members of a different race. But there are very few, if any, who have an exclusive “extra-racial sexual orientation,” that is, being capable of finding their better half ONLY in members of a different race.

When anti-gay marriage activists respond to the pro-gay claim that homosexuals are being denied the right to marry, it is claimed that gays, like everybody else, have the equal right to marry members of the opposite sex. The same argument was made regarding interracial couplings: You have every right to marry members of your own race. And this prohibition applies equally to whites as it does to blacks. No one group has greater rights than the other.

Yet, it was clearly cruel and unfair to deny two individuals who love and want to commit to one another, the right to marry simply because they are of mixed races. And keeping in mind the exclusiveness of a homosexual orientation that really has no counterpart in those who might prefer interracial couplings, we can see how it is even more cruel and unfair to deny marriage to same-sex couples: At least a person who has been in love with a member of a different race has a fighting chance of finding someone in his or her own race to fall in love with and build a life together. Yet a homosexual person has no chance of being able to forge a meaningful marriage with a member of the opposite sex. This is why Andrew Sullivan and Jonathan Rauch argue that gays want the right to marry someone in a meaningful sense. Because right now, gays don’t have the right to marry anyone in a meaningful sense. The ban on interracial marriages never impacted whole groups of individuals in such a broad and sweeping way.