Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
If you guys are right, isn't the entire second sentence superfluous? The only way a state or federal law could be construed to require that the legal incidents of marital status be conferred on unmarried couples is if a legislature, state or federal, tried to permit civil unions.
|
Didn't the Mass SJC -- not a legislature -- do just that?
On the whole, I think the precise meaning is irrelevant, both politically and legally. Politically because it's pretty clear what Bush, and any other proponent's position on gay marriage is. The possibility of legislatively initiated civil unions is of secondary, or even tertiary, importance. Legally, because it won't pass, and certainly won't be ratified by 38 states.
