Nosmo King
Gold Member
If laws were not intended to be changed, amended or abandoned, there would not be the means to do so incorporated in our system of jurisprudence. Should Alabama or Mississippi abandon Jim Crow due to 'emotional' pressure, or was it the right thing to do? Right to respect the rights of all their citizens, right to respect the rights of all Americans?But what if they are in love and want to have sex together and be married that way? Like what I saw just today..![]()
Marriage is a legal contract. LEGAL CONTRACT!
Love, sex, incest, what have you is not germane to the discussion of contract law. You can 'but what if...' all day, so long as it concerns the state licensed institution provided in the legal contract.
In California, the state licensing forbids marriage between other than a man and a woman because that's what the constitution there still says to this very minute is only legal. So strictly, contractually speaking in the driest interpretation of law, gay marriage is illegal in California. Only sedition of rogue officials and emotions are saying it's "legal" there..
And since the emotions saying "gay marriage is legal" in places where it patently is not, what stops the emotion of other adults in love who don't fit the one man one woman not related laws? Answer: nothing. Because the yardstick used for this sedition is "do not deny consenting adults in love the "right" of marriage". And that yardstick doesn't arbitrarily stop at just people in the church of LGBT...
What possible legal justification is there to continue to repress tax paying citizens who are not committing any crime simply by being different from others?