No hon, DOMA changed the definition of marriage. If marriage had been already defined as "solely between a man and a woman" then DOMA wouldn't have been needed. Damn you are stupid. There WAS NO LAW THAT ALREADY DEFINED MARRIAGE AS SOLELY BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN!!!! I love that you are getting snitty!! So fundie of you!!<quoted text>
Okay, it's school time again tonight. Seriously, you are going to have to start paying me. And I don't come cheap!
DOMA was a response to gays trying to dumb down the definition of marriage TO CHANGE THE LAWS THAT ALREADY DEFINED MARRIAGE. A definition that keeps gay couples distinct.
Yawn. Did SCOTUS limit marriage to only those that procreated? Pssssst, that's a "yes" or "no" question!!!!!<quoted text>
In fact, the SCOTUS had already determined marriage was a right BECAUSE OF THE IMPORTANCE OF PROCREATION IN MARRIAGE FOR ALL OF SOCIETY!
Yes, you fundies all have the same responses. You are nothing new or special. What you are too though, is a deceitful piece of shyt who STILL (sorry had to break through the fog) can't establish a valid argument to deny gays marriage!!! Let us know when you can do that. Heck, for that matter, let us know when you can provide a reason that gays shouldn't have children. You certianly do like harping on that one!!!! Oh, and also, let us know when procreation is a mandate for marriage!!!!<quoted text>
I hate to capitalize so much, but I'm simply trying to get through the fog. I'm sure you have run into that response before.
You still got nuthin'!!!