We don’t even have to go that far (although I certainly think we should extend it to sexual orientation… religion’s mostly a choice, but it’s a very personal and life-affecting choice, so sexual orientation seems to me to be even more important to protect). Scalia’s reasoning’s still inconsistent, because laws against homosexual sex or marriage are already unconstitutional under the existing classes of race and sex.
It is illegal for a man to have sex with a man.
It is legal for a woman to have sex with a man.
Likewise, it is illegal for a woman to have sex with a woman.
It is legal for a man to have sex with a woman.
We have two cases where the law is discriminating against one gender (four, if you include marriage!). That gay men have the right to marry any women they want doesn’t matter, any more than, in interracial marriage debates, the fact that blacks had the right to marry other blacks and whites had the right to marry other whites. They were STILL being discriminated against.
