SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: JohnM who wrote (2804)6/29/2003 1:02:13 AM
From: D. Long  Read Replies (1) of 793851
 
Suffice to say, Kennedy wrote his opinion as a privacy case, not a marriage law case. The two are not the same.

Unsupported assertion. Where's the beef John? Prove your assertion if you're going to bandy it about in ignorance.

This was a bad ruling, on all the merits. The statute could have been narrowly overturned on equal protection grounds, as O'Connor argued. But it wasn't, it was an overly broad and ambiguous ruling that created a rule out of Constitutional thin air. This is judicial activism at its most base and politically craven. It was tailored to legalize homosexual marriage.

Derek
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News