Not looking at it objectively? That's rich coming from you. Nowhere written in our constitution does it say marriage is between a man and a woman. I agree both issues should be left up to the states and it still is! It merely strikes down the law saying gays can't get benefits.
If it's left up to the states, why was the will of the people in California ignored?
That's all they want ivy, they aren't trampling on anything else. Their relationships are just as equal as straight ones. Love is not limited to straight people.
No, what they want is to force their lifestyle on everybody. Hide and watch. This federal victory won't be enough. Gay activists, and their liberal supporters like the ACLU, have already said they are going to "take the fight" to each state, one by one.
And don't think I'm wrong ivy in saying where you love you got nothing to worry about
Unless the liberal wing of the Supreme Court attempt to pull another stunt like they did yesterday.
Article III of the US Constitution provides the US Supreme Court with appellate jurisdiction, in law, equity, and fact. The Congress is free to except any potential litigation it wants from the Court's appellate jurisdiction.
By the way, civil unions do not provide gay couples with federal protections and benefits.
You must be from the klydon college of legal studies. The Supreme Court is supposed to
interpret law. Not to
create it by twisting, stretching, and perverting the Constitution so much that they create laws (or "rights") out of thin air. That's how we got legalized abortion based on "right to privacy" and now gay marriage based on "equal protection."
