The right's dangerous legal argument
Find a Conversation
The right's dangerous legal argument
| Thu, 03-05-2009 - 9:46pm |
Appearing for the supporters of Prop 8, Kenneth Starr, the former Whitewater prosecutor, said the people hold the right to modify the state constitution by adding or subtracting protections for civil rights.
Court appears ready to uphold Prop. 8
Full length fiction: worlds undone
"You have no power over my body..." ~ Anne Hutchinson
"You think you know, sir!" ~ Cornflake Girl ~ Tori Amos.

Pages
Which word are you talking about?
>>> From your numerous posts stated that marriage and religion are not separate, it seems as though you obviously care. I was merely pointing out a FACT that proved you wrong. The above statement (fact or not) does not refute what I said in my post.
That marriage and religion are intertwined is not a concern, it's a fact. And after your inability to prove otherwise, I've simply stopped caring about debating the point.
>>> If the will of the people were the only reason law existed, we might still have bans against interacial marriage.
Not likely.
>>> USSC overturned those bans against the "will of the people"...and it will happen that way again soon.
Really? Was there a nation vote on interracial marriage that I'm unaware of?
>>> Protection from the tyranny of the majority counts.
Defending our social and religious institutions counts.
>>> So long tyranny, hello equality.
I'm sure lots of folks in California felt that way last May.
Read up on the Loving V. Virginia ruling.
while they may be intertwined for some, legal marriage has no religions requirement,
That's the fact.
<>
"In other words...NO."
Speak incorrectly for others often?
Pages