Bill Baker Prove it. The reason why there's no license is very material. There's no reason for a license. Do you get it now? I've never said that what the judges have ruled proves anything. You have. It's up to you to back it up. Or is it just that you agree with them and you really aren't that concerned with whether they are ruling in an unbiased fashion. Not a driver's license. They can't without being involved. Yes, now you understand. Sure they can. Two consenting adults can sign a contract for almost anything they wish. They can sign a contract stating that they believe they are frogs and need to cohabitate in a lily pond if they so desire. That's the way it currently is in all 50 states. Now we're on the same page. It was your statement. It's up to you to back it up. Jones v. Hallahan, De Santo v. Barnsley, Estate of Cooper where the court said, "Persons of the same love have no consbreastutional rights to enter into a marriage with each other.", Dean v. District of Columbia where the court ruled that under current D.C. laws, the District of Columbia could refuse to grant marriage licenses to same-love couples because members of the same love do not meet the definition of a married couple under law. Etc... Prove it.
|
