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

To: Amendment10
The statute defines marriage for the purposes of the Act in terms of who participates in it in a way consistent with the entire history of law including more than 1000 years of the Common Law and marriage as defined by all 50 states at the time the law was written.

When Alito says the "definition of marriage" under that kind of context it's clear that the definition is expository, falls clearly under the judicial discretion afforded to terms in common use, and is not a regulation. I know you've got an untenable position to defend, but please stop being outrageously silly or I'll have to stop discussing this with you.

138 posted on 06/26/2013 9:48:51 PM PDT by FredZarguna (Separated by a common language.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]


To: FredZarguna; All
"I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground: That "all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the people." [X Amendment] To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specifically drawn around the powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition (emphasis added)." --Thomas Jefferson: National Bank Opinion, 1791.

139 posted on 06/26/2013 9:59:23 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | 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