That's a cute little tidbit, but that doesn't really have anything to do with the point I made. If there is or ever was a constitutional right to drugs, it was never covered by the constitutional right to bear arms. The issue is with the attempt to legally redefine a term that was established through religion.
And if you're tryign to argue based on something that was established during teh roman era, please point me out to where two men or women were actually "married" and not just living together. I don't recall examples of any official ceremony being used to celebrate the union between two people who could not have children, as the typical purpose of weddings like that is to ensure that the children have both the father and mother working together to raise them.
Personally, I don't even mind if gay people call it marriage, but it does need to be established that the legal recognition of a gay union does not require any religion to recognize it.
 |
Seppukuties is like LBP Lite, on crack. Play it already!Currently wrapped up in: Half Life, Portal, and User Created Source Mods
|
