Originally Posted by WESGATORS
What is enforceable by the laws of the land is what is at stake here, though. If we're willing to modify one component of the law, then wouldn't it follow that the other could be modified just the same? We shouldn't attempt to base justification on existing laws otherwise we wouldn't be having the discussion about homosexual marriages. The racial discrimination comparisons have been refuted on this site time and time again. And still, racial discrimination is not only legally permissible in certain situations, but it is required in certain situations (see NFL's Rooney Rule and other AA-based policies). Even with that, race is self-identified in this country. You can be whatever race you choose to be.
Laws can always be modified of course, but I happen to agree with the concept that the government should protect citizens from some types of discrimination (can't be denied service at privately owned place of business based on race) while not others (guest to a private dinner must be invited based on racial quotas). I don't accept your proposition that the comparison with racial discrimination has already been refuted on TH - do it again.