For clarity's sake ...

... let me put the thrust of my "trespassing" post this way.

You wrote:

"I feel it is perfectly justifiable to keep suicide on the books as "illegal" because I simply cannot imagine any person in their full mental and emotional capacity capable of killing themselves. Depression, anxiety, chemical addiction... all are factors in nearly every case and thus negate the argument that it is a decision made by a rational individual capable of understanding right and wrong . . . Multiple marriages, child marriages, and any obviously abusive associations that you wish to hold up as examples of the "evil" associated with a deviant lifestyle are also regulated by the government... because they are harmful to individuals that are either not part of the decision making process involved or are incapable of making the decisions themselves."

Of course it is possible for an advocate of polygamy or a chronically pain ridden patient contemplating assistant suicide, or even a scientist whom wants to clone himself (a nontraditional form of conception if you will), to have both complete control of their mental faculties and in no way "endanger" an innocent fellow human being in the course of their actions. Thus they do not "need" the government to "make decisions for them." Your posturing is erroneous in its' generalizing assumptions, and perhaps a little ignorant in its' stereotyping. The reasons you listed are not the reasons these acts are illegal. Being in your "full emotional capacity" is the not the standard for judging the legality of a given act (otherwise the three of us would have been prohibited from marrying our ex wives).

The reason we maintain those acts as illegal is because it offends our collective sense of morality. Our sense of right and wrong. We deny as "rights" these acts to consenting, of age adults whom are not hurting anyone else in their actions because the vast majority of Americans have judged it immoral, and antithetical to the functioning of a healthy society as we understand one. Thus we consent to our government the right to enforce, or "regulate", that morality by law. And this is the exact argument I, and a majority of Americans, have made for opposing the legality of gay marriage - it not only offends our sense of morality and right and wrong, but it is also antithetical to the functioning of a healthy society, as we understand one.

Now you can disagree with that contention on gay marriage, that's fine. But you can NOT disagree with it yet maintain your support of the government's right, via our consent, to regulate polygamy, chronic illness suicide, or self induced cloning. The two positions are irreconcilable. When it comes to the actions of consenting, fully sane adults whose actions harm no one else you either believe in the governments authority (again, via our consent) to enforce those actions as illegal based on our collective national moral sensibilities, or you do not.