"Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don't think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to
have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the "wrong kind of person" for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no
matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over
others. Especially if it denies people’s civil rights.
I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard's and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so
many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That's what Loving, and loving, are all about. "
So you can take your sanctimonious claiming of HER court case and what it really means and go whine all you like.
Marriage is not anywhere in the Constitution, but equal protection is. As long as the government recognizes any marriage, equal protection means it should recognize all. And frankly, it should be dealt with as a religious freedom issue as well. Why should the pastor of one church have the ceremony he performs be recognized and a different pastor performing the same ceremony not have the same standing?