Originally Posted by patteeu
When the US constitution was written and ratified (including the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment), there was no expectation that private employers would be prevented from discriminating even on the basis of race, ethnicity, and religion. That's a more modern development that may well be a good one, but it comes from a line of thinking that is in direct conflict with the idea of freedom that inspired our constitution in the first place. The change should have required an amendment.
So, no, our constitution doesn't draw that line and it's not clear within the four corners of the document.
It goes to the first amendment. Jefferson referred to it in his famous letter. As a society we have to allow "the Church" to operate without interference from "the State", and "the State" must not be influenced by "the Church." Things like performing religious ceremonies, choices about who does and does not get ordained or financial decisions involving member donations are off limits to "the State."
But, by that very same token, "the Church" isn't allowed to carry it's doctrine or its dogma out into the secular world. They aren't allowed to compel others to change their behavior. Religious beliefs are not allowed to be written into law. Of course we can vote against SSM. If we want to vote it down because we think it's an abomination before God we are free to do so. It doesn't matter why we vote the way we do in the eyes of the law. The problem is that the law has to stand on its own merit. Their must be a legitimate reason for that law to exist other than "God said so" or it will be, and should be, struck down.