wrote in message No, that really is only your opinion. You have a right to hold any opinion you wish, no matter how wrong it may be. Why is there no reason for the state to be involved in a same-love union? Sure it does. The judges interpret consbreastutional law, as their job requires. No judge has yet seen any reason for denying any same-love marriages. And no reason for the state to deny same-gender unions. Prove that it's merely the judges' bias. Nope. They're overturning unjust laws if they exist at all. Don't need to. The consbreastutional laws say that you cannot discriminate against people based on gender. That's why so many judges have been ruling in favor of same-love marriage. Very well. Rhode Island, for example has no laws that prohibit same-love marriage. Don't look now, sweetie, but I just did. sanc�ti�ty 1. Holiness of life or disposition; saintliness. 2. The quality or condition of being considered sacred; inviolability. 3. Something considered sacred. Middle English sauncbreaste, from Old French saincbreaste, from Latin sancbreastas, from sanctus, sacred. See sanctify. Source: The American Heritage� Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition As for the separation of church and state, see the First Amendment to the Consbreastution. Marriage is a contract and gender is not a legitimate reason to restrict two people from signing any contract. Your denial does not change the facts. -- Jesus loves me He loves me a bunch 'Cause he always puts Skippy in my lunch
|
