 | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —John Neal
|
| | | (...) And in California and Massachusetts, but it's still illegal. (...) Change comes when the majority decide it should change, not a tiny minority. JOHN (21 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | (...) Let's see--by this logic, 5 therefore people count as the majority in a pool of some 100+ million voters. Hmm... Dave! (21 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —David Laswell
|
| | | | | (...) That's only true because the state law supercedes the local law. California also ruled that it's legal to prescribe medicinal marijuana, but it's still a federal offense to do so. (...) Change rarely requires a true majority in the US legal (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —Allister McLaren
|
| | | | (...) I thought we were considering the definition of marraige, not the legality or otherwise of that definition. Even so, there is a world outside the USA. Muslim countries all over the world permit polygamy. One woman + one man = marraige isn't a (...) (21 years ago, 23-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
