Actually, the cited case had absolutely nothing to do with the thousands of rights under federal law and instead relied upon this new constitutional right to respect and dignity to reach its decision.
The right to life, liberty and the persuit of happiness could be interpreted to mean allowing same-sex couples the same respect and dignity that opposite sex couples enjoy. Having to settle for a different name or fewer rights isn't offering them dignity or respect and very clearly encroaches on their liberty. Whilst that section of the Constitution could be interpreted to permit a lot of things, it's part of the overall reasoning. I think my rationale regarding equal protection/due process is the best argument. I also believe Walker declared Prop 8 Unconstitutional as per the 14th Amendment, not "dignity and respect"...
Revealing how effortlessly you abandon on argument, to move onto the next Thats usually how you preface the stuff you make up as you go along Yep. From the Walker case
dixon, if people find your arguments to be irrelevant and/or not much of a challenge... why would YOU expect them to continue along the line of argument you prefer?
Yes, but your often alogical and irrelevant approach/responses encourage the very thing you complained about. I'm surely not the only person who can see that.
I read it. And I PROMISE YOU... you aren't leading me in pre-drawn circles with your BS logic. Get real.
Your insults are just petty foolishness. In any case, I'm not the only person who has addressed you about those things.