Quote:
Originally Posted by KSig RC
Meh, it seems like the argument is a non-starter from any aspect other than the technical (i.e. "the only one that matters" but hey - message board!) . . . I'd run it something like this:
The state's interest in limiting marriage to two people can be proven "sufficiently important" for any number of qualifying reasons, including . . .
|
Oh, I'd counter it that way, too. I think those are the sorts of arguments that would be made. But just because those arguments would be made doesn't mean that the suit wouldn't be brought, and that was my point: a suit along those lines will be brought. Whether it will be successful is a whole 'nother question. Typically, good judges have thought about the cases that could follow and have carefully tailored their opinions to the issues before them accordingly. (But judges have been known to do surprising things.)
And for what it's worth, I wouldn't be surprised if such a suit included a free exercise of religion aspect. Again, not saying it would carry the day, but I won't be surprised to see someone try it.
Hybrid Mode
