Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
STP, SAM, STP.
But I wouldn't call it a rush. The amendment's text has been kicking around for a while.
Rather than debate the semantics, let me pose this challenge:
Redraft the amendment so that it accomplishes what it purportedly intended to do (by public statements). To wit: 1) Ban marriage other than between a man and a woman; 2) prohibit any state or federal court from requiring a state to offer a marriage equivalent to gay couples; 3) allow state legislatures to enact civil union laws providing the same (or similar) "incidents" of marriage to gay couples, so long as their doing so is not under compulsion of a court ruling.
|
(a) You know I don't do that. I have no objection to repeating precisely what someone else has already said. It is worth hearing because it comes from me -- raises the credibility.
(b) That would be a whole different ball of wax, and it will not happen.
S_A_M
