Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: GrandEagle
I meant you're right on your post 17. My reply to your post 19 is my post 23. LOL! I should have copied your points. Sorry about that.
24 posted on 03/23/2004 4:41:44 PM PST by King Black Robe (With freedom of religion and speech now abridged, it is time to go after the press.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: King Black Robe
7. My reply to your post 19 is my post 23. LOL!
LOL! I guess that's what happened when I follow-up too quickly!
Anyway, your points are very sound and I can see your point of view. I am still more scared of giving the SCOTUS a legal point to go after by mentioning marriage in the Constitution. I would like it better if the Congress simply removed the SCOTUS and federal courts jurisdiction on any issue regarding marriage.
If the folks in say, California wanted to sanction homosexual "marriages", then they have that power. Just don't bend over when there.

The most persuasive point you made was about the redefinition of marriage completely reshaping our society. In that context I suppose that a carefully worded amendment would be in order.
I suppose I'm about 55% to 45% in favor of my point of view.
52 posted on 03/23/2004 8:01:28 PM PST by GrandEagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson