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

To: CrazyJoeDivola

It’s a STATE constitutional amendment. The judge is claiming that amendment violates the FEDERAL constitutional guarantee of equal protection under law.

This is what makes it so dangerous...as all it would take is a federal judge to agree with her...(and the Supremes to duck the issue) and it becomes de facto law in every state.

Which is why McCain et al. are so foolish to avoid a federal constitutional amendment to protect marriage.


24 posted on 10/03/2009 8:38:54 AM PDT by AnalogReigns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: AnalogReigns

“The judge is claiming that amendment violates the FEDERAL constitutional guarantee of equal protection under law.”

So then laws against polygamy are also unconstitutional?

(That’s next,folks........it’s all part of the agenda!)

THE 1972 GAY RIGHTS PLATFORM
(Formulated in Chicago, Illinois.)

8. Repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into
a marriage unit; and the extension of legal benefits to all persons who cohabit regardless
of sex or numbers. (1972 State-8)
http://www.afa.net/homosexual_agenda/ha1972.htm


28 posted on 10/03/2009 9:14:14 AM PDT by massmike (...So this is what happens when OJ's jury elects the president....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | 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