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
is it possible to be marxist and muslim and gay and an illegal usurper?
Yes, if one is also a reptilian.
Kate
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Wait...reptilian, marxist, muslim, gay and an illegal usurper?
Kate
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
>>> Yes, and folks can choose which truck to buy.
And that's relevant how?
>>> The solution of civil unions being the name for the legal rights we all get and marriage being the name for a religious union would be analagous to the trucks. Both are available to everyone, and a couple can choose which truck they are interested in.
Oh...so you want to take away rights from heterosexuals. I see.
>>> The back of the bus still gets you to work but we don't think it appropriate to tell folks that they MUST ride back there if they want a ride.
Riding on front or the back of the bus doesn't change the definition of "bus."
How does allowing equality in marriage take rights away from heterosexuals?
It's not an either/or deal.
If gays get married, heterosexuals can STILL get married.
Were not talking about a bus, we're talking about EQUAL access to the bus.
Being forced to ride in the back is not equal access.
Pages