Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
I think you have correctly pointed out a deficiency in the drafting, but not in the intent.
|
I don't think they are stupid enough to draft it deficiently, and I think that they are against any state recognizing same-sex unions. Therefore, I disagree, but we won't know unless they clarify it to say what you say they intended, and we may never know if they don't change it.
If they don't change it and it's eventually interpreted to require that no state law -- even one that specifically addresses and legalizes civil unions -- may be interpreted to permit civil unions, then I'm sure there will be people who will have plausible deniability when they say "oh no! what has happened?? how can this be?!?!? we didn't intend it this way!!"
Depending on who is saying that, they'd be either stupid or disingenuous (aka lying).
