What's even more shocking it the article has changed from the first time I read it.
In the ruling as quoted in the original piece, the Courts stated that heterosexual marriages were important because they were intended for procreation and necessary for social good.
Did anyone else notice the change??
Oops, should post the link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100816/ap_on_re_us/us_gay_marriage_trial
it = is (minor clean up)
Just read the link you gave and it said, “Supporters argued the ban was necessary to safeguard the traditional understanding of marriage and to encourage responsible childbearing.”
I would LOVE to have the judges concur with this!