Homosexual marriage & presidential eligibility as a natural born citizen. Yeah, I can see that they are identical legal issuesl
At the Supreme Court, Justices Thomas and Alito have voted against gay marriage in every instance but they have not voted to hear any challenge to Obama’s eligibility and they have both rejected issuing injunctions to stop Obama from taking office.
There are many state court judges and justices who have also never voted in favor of homosexual marriage and those same judges and justices also have never voted for Obama to be declared ineligible.
I don’t think you are missing the point so much as attempting to obscure it. If you are genuinely & honestly missing the point...that is scary.
I can’t make it any clearer than I already have, so I will reiterate. You compulsively cite the figure of how many courts/judges have ruled against eligibility cases. You put forth the argument that so overwhelming a majority legal opinion means there is no merit in such cases.
A similar overwhelming majority of judges/courts have ruled that the Constitution is more concerned with redefining marriage so that two homosexuals have a right to traditional marriage identical to that of a man & a woman than it is with respecting states’ rights. If an overwhelming legal majority means anything in eligibility cases—and you say it does—then you must make the same argument in favor of Constitutionally mandated same sex marriage. But if an overwhelming majority of judges/courts is wrong on homosexual marriage, then the same overwhelming majority could be just as wrong on eligibility.
Can you understand my simple terms? Or will you try desperately to tap dance around this obvious point?