Andre Lieven No proof? Claim... fails. So we're back to proving that the Supreme Court is wrong. Can you do it? That has already been provided by the cases that have come before the judges. On your part. Surrender noted. Nothing in "common law" states that a couple has to be able to provide a mother and a father to a child. Claim... fails. I will when you do. All children do NOT have a mother and a father raising them, though. And there are many gay couples with children. On your part. So you're implying that you would deny interracial couples the right to get married. Thanks for that concession. You said it was "NOT a societal interest". I agreed. I didn't change the context. I spoke of no laws. I only spoke of overturning unjust laws. Or not, as history has shown. On your part. Just like blacks had the same rights as whites to marry someone of their own race. Funny, the courts don't seem to share your view. On your part. OK, show me where in the Consbreastution it defines marriage. Surrender noted. Clbuttic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. Irrelevant. Consummation is not needed for a valid marriage. No proof that they do? Claim... fails. They will, just watch. Haven't you seen what happened in Nebraska? Soon that will happen to all unjust laws.
|
