For starters they will need to "moralize" their choice through school education programs.which is why he diverted from saying that "but but but gays have always had equal marriage rights".....to....its a matter of not wanting to normalize gay lifestyles because of "predictable surprises."Of course your not because Loving was decided on the same constitutional principles as Obergefell but you don't want to hear that.. You can't say that Obergefell was a bad decision without saying that Loving was a bad decision, and if you did , you would be labeled a racist which is somewhat out of fashion. So you won't touch Loving with a ten foot pool. You want to walk that fine line between being an anti gay bigot while appearing to be for racial equality. I'm here to tell you and everyone that racial and sexual bigots are cut from the same cloth and that your mentality would just as soon focus your hate on blacks vs gays in a different era. Haters have got to hate. It's just a matter of who is the most convenient target and what you can get away with at a particular time in historyI'm not arguing Loving v Virginia.Your idiotic argument was made in Loving v Virginia and repeated as an argument against same sex marriageThat argument was never made. If it had been made then polygamy would be legal based upon your logic.
failed both times
He already blew his wad, bro....you can take the night off
also, *pole, lol... (you had pool)
I asked before what those “ predicable surprises “ are but can’t get an answer
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk