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

To: SmithL

I think they have a valid point.

We have too many idiots who have no foundation in legal argument clouding the issue with “biblical static” which is NOT the issue here.

The question NOW before the court is whether procedures were followed correctly.

It is akin to the nonsense of deinstitutionalizing marriage by precluding government recognition.

This is a sound LEGAL strategy to eliminate the static.


14 posted on 11/24/2008 8:30:14 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: longtermmemmory

“I think they have a valid point.”

BULL BOVINE!

The people, for a variety of reasons, voiced their decision....TWICE. Now, because that decision did not reflect the liberals ideology (and you wish to bring up “biblical static”?), they tried to use the courts (and are now trying to use our judicial branch AGAIN) to completely invalid the publics decisions.

What are ya, a gay advocate?!


17 posted on 11/24/2008 8:35:45 AM PST by This Just In (Support Christian Homeschoolers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

To: longtermmemmory

Exactly! See my post #16


18 posted on 11/24/2008 8:36:20 AM PST by ElkGroveDan (Reagan is back, and this time he's a woman.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

To: longtermmemmory

this should be based on law and it was done by the law and now it is law.

The court has no right to change this by law.

It is a wasted of time trying to argue with the left or the homo’s basing the argument on religion as they do not care for religion.

So the best argument seeing as they believe in nature and evolution is base the argument on that.

Nature intended a man and a woman to reproduce not two oft he same sex. now of course sex with the same sex might be entertaining for them and they might enjoy it but it does not give them the right to marry each other.
The constitution does not state this and the law does not state this for it it did then the same argument could and I ma sure will be used for a man and a dog, a woman and her son, a man and 15 wives.

A line has to be drawn and it was in CA amongst other states , now the homo’s do not like it but no one has took any right away from them even if they keep harping on about it.
They are acting like spoilt brats who are sulking because they never got their way or their agenda took a massive defeat for them.

They want marriage, then adoption then teaching it in schools.
We only have to look at MA to see how the homo agenda has took a turn for radical teaching in schools and brainwashing of our children


25 posted on 11/24/2008 10:44:12 AM PST by manc (Marriage is between a man and a woman no sick MA,CT sham marriage end racism end affirmative action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | 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