Epiphany is too good of a word to waste on these ramblings. Maybe one of my writer friends and acquaintances knows a better word. For now let’s just say I had a small lowercase epiphany
( Read more... )
Bravo! Thanks for this, I was SO disconsolate after that horrible -- what was it called? Prop 14? or something. Heh heh, but you're right. They've already lost.
Not to say dunderheads aren't still making noise and making life as unpleasant as possible for gays, but now I just smile to myself. I'm sure the dinosaurs also made an awful uproar just before the last one crashed to earth, dead.
It was 416. I was at the state capital when the number was selected by the flip of a coin. The federal appeals, while not a landmark case, reaffirmed an another landmark case making the Nebraska amendment a nationally important case in its own right.
A government's justification for suppressing rights through the creation of a minority status does not require truth or be based in facts. The government’s reasoning cannot later be disputed in court. An attorney's general statements have to be accepted as undisputed fact in these cases.
In this case marriage is for the sole purpose of having babies. The fact that married couples do not have babies, in the words our supreme court, is solely a theoretical possibility and not a fact. I have no belief in the Roberts court. He has thrown out settled case law and instituted full-scale politics.
Comments 4
Reply
Not to say dunderheads aren't still making noise and making life as unpleasant as possible for gays, but now I just smile to myself. I'm sure the dinosaurs also made an awful uproar just before the last one crashed to earth, dead.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
I also like your avatar. :)
Reply
A government's justification for suppressing rights through the creation of a minority status does not require truth or be based in facts. The government’s reasoning cannot later be disputed in court. An attorney's general statements have to be accepted as undisputed fact in these cases.
In this case marriage is for the sole purpose of having babies. The fact that married couples do not have babies, in the words our supreme court, is solely a theoretical possibility and not a fact. I have no belief in the Roberts court. He has thrown out settled case law and instituted full-scale politics.
Reply
Leave a comment