Remember the Maine

Yes, it's a political post. And only 5 days in...and I'm slow on the topic, even!

I was hoping that the gay marriage referendum would uphold the right to marry for same-sex couples. They should be able to marry. But I got to thinking about which of the following is more amazing:

• That over half of people in that state don't think gay people should marry the person they love.
• That over half of people in that state think they have a right to deny a gay person the right to marry the person they love.

The second point is what I will take issue with here. The first one, well, that's unfortunate. But bigots die, and their ideas often go with them. Look at the leaders of such protests. Older, right? Occasionally you'll get a young proponent of "opposite marriage," but, for the most part, young people don't care. And the younger care even less. This is a *good* thing. It means that such ideas as equal rights for LGBT(etc.)s are, while not inevitable, part of the progression of civil rights that really, truly, only recently started if you take a historical perspective. Think about it, the last Civil War veteran's widow died in 2004. Civil War. That's not a typo. Surely there are still people alive with merely 2nd hand information from that time.
But bigotry, as I said, is not my main concern. They'll die or they'll learn. Either way...
So, regarding the second point:
Simply put, I don't want people forcing me to do things that I do not want to do. And, so, I don't think I should force other people to do things they might not want to do.
Does that sound familiar? It should. It's not as practical as some ideals, but...
Of course, that doesn't mean someone will not berate, belittle, insult, and cause a general ruckus when someone does or says something they don't like. But people have a right to determine the way they live their lives, especially when it doesn't affect anyone else.
From the evidence, most people don't think so. They like laws against drugs, guns, sexuality, gender variance, inter-racial relationships, and they like being able to discriminate based on any thing at all. It has been, for decades in America, almost always courts and specific leaders who have stood up against these majorities to protect minorities. The world doesn't fall apart, and everything is OK. Then the bigots die or learn.
Sometimes I'll read a reaction to such referendums like Maine that says, "Can I vote on your marriage?" Of course not. On it's face, it's an absurdity. But not because heterosexual marriage is debatable (and it is); it's absurd because it's not anyone's place to dictate someone how to live their life.
Advice? Argument? You'll get them, when I can muster the strength to mutter a few words here and there. But should I force you to do these things? No. Should I force you not to? Even less than no reason.
I am sure that everyone that reads this has something innocent and harmless about them or that they like to do that would not be allowed if put to a vote; and if you don't think so, then I think you need to get out and take a look around.
So, should gay people (and polys, and every other adult who wants to marry another consenting adult) be able to marry? Yes! For fairness? Yes! For equality? Yes! Because it's the right thing to do? Yes! Of course. Yes, for all these reasons and more.
But most importantly, it is because we are must maintain our freedom from our tyrannical government and tyrannical fellow citizens. Not simply for this issue, but for the ones we cannot even fathom...

I would suppose that such an attitude might be a type of small-L libertarianism; I can take that if your scope is individual freedom. I'd rather have legal arrangements like marriage handled by contract, for the record.

Just so it's clear, I think the people for same-sex marriage are on the right side here, but their arguments are more robust than fairness and equality...