The next civil war was pre-ordained by the last.
The clincher to the article points out that the *federal* law is being ignored by the *federal* government. That is, it is written in such a way that they can *interpret* it into meaninglessness.
Using such expressions as “substantially burden”, “is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest”, and “is the least restrictive means of furthering” that interest, is ridiculous, especially when signed by a president who argued over “what the definition of ‘is’, is.”
So what is the value of a state law written in this way?
Bupkis. Zero. Nada.
The state law has to be crystal clear to have any effect, and it isn’t.
We made a deal here in NYS...Priests don’t have to perform gay marriages. So now you have to be a priest to be anti-gay marriage??
placemark