I feel like I've noticed a pattern in discussions about gay marriage. The pattern (pretty vivid in this thread) is that there is a fundamental disagreement on what the default position should be.
The default position is the position you hold until evidence suggests that you must change your position.
Opponents of the Supreme Court decision say that prohibiting gay marriage is the default position since it has been illegal throughout history.
Proponents say that allowing gay marriage is the default position since laws require justification, especially if they seek to limit or restrict something.
Neither party finds the reasons for abandoning the default position to be compelling, so they talk past each other.
My questions for you all: "What's going on in people's minds during arguments on gay marriage?" and "Is the default position to ban or allow gay marriage?"