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

To: djf

The important point is that its defined that way.

The abuse of power that the courts have engaged in - and which the activist SCOTUS is attempting to finalize - was to redefine the word to mean something it did not.

If language means nothing then the law falls.

They are the ones pushing it over the cliff.


9 posted on 01/18/2015 12:01:03 PM PST by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Regulator

And it has been defined that way, basically forever.

Now how the Supreme Court can think they can redefine the language is beyond me.

Call it civil unions, call it whatever the hell you want.
Give them all the cozy legal rights (which they can already do with power of attorney but don’t realize)...

But you cannot call it marriage.


15 posted on 01/18/2015 12:10:25 PM PST by djf (OK. Well, now, lemme try to make this clear: If you LIKE your lasagna, you can KEEP your lasagna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | 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