There have been many laws that have been wrong on their face.
I am not opposed to civil unions myself since I don't think it's the government's responsibility to make morality into law. However, I do object to turn white into black and black into white. Marriage has always meant between a man and a woman and we should allow all this nonsense because homosexuals feel entitled to change the definition of a word. My union with my wife is not the same as two men or two women together.
While I disagree with changing the definition of a word, I find it absolutely repulsive that Judge Walker finds it ok to make up stuff in the constitution. The way he uses the 14 amendment to justify his answer is completely stupid. Under is reasoning every law must apply to everyone equally. So in my opinion his answer just declared that everyone must get the same social benefits and be taxed exactly the same. No one person can be held in any sort of special status. If this ruling is allowed to stand the 14th will be allowed to be used to eliminate any sort of social law they choose.
I know they say it's crazy that this will lead to marrying a dog or other social obscurities as that. But with this ruling using the equal protection clause and abortion ruling using the right to privacy, I don't see how that combination of case law doesn't makes that an absolute certainty.
Civil unions ARE the government sticking it's nose in the business of churches.
Almondjoy: “I don’t think it’s the government’s responsibility to make morality into law.”
That’s just it, Almondjoy. Nearly every law is based on morality. For example, laws against stealing, murder, and littering are based on morality. They all involve making moral judgments, typically with the majority opinion being held as most moral. The question isn’t whether or not government should legislate morality. What you should be concerned about is WHO’s morality is being made into law and where that is leading us as a culture.