In a recent blog, I mentioned that a judge had ruled heterosexual marriage as unconstitutional. One of my readers responded with the following question:

“I hadn’t heard about the marriage “ruling”.  Who, when, where, etc?”

RESPONSE:

It’s Judge Joseph Tauro in Boston ruling in favor of gay couples’ rights in a challenge  to the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act,  which claims that one state need not recognize the marriage of another state. Tauro argues that the law interferes with the right of states to define marriage. Of course the law does the opposite: It says that one state need not recognize the marriage of another state. I guess one has to go to law school to understand how judges find this stuff between the lines.

Also, let us not forget that California recently defined marriage and is now being taken to federal court to have this new law (a part of their own constitution) over ruled. So much for interfering with state rights.

You see,  here’s how the wisdom works: States have a right to define marriage anyway they want, so long as they define it in a manner consistent with the militant Gay Agenda.

Share this on