- Joined
- Jul 1, 2011
- Messages
- 67,218
- Reaction score
- 28,530
- Location
- Lower Hudson Valley, NY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Now you are using the language of rational basis review--i.e. saying the "government has no legitimate interest in a law" that excludes same-sex partners from marriage. If this is just a matter for rational basis review, why were you so desperately trying to claim this is all about a fundamental right, and so calls for strict scrutiny? Which is it, no fundamental right and therefore rational basis review--or fundamental right and strict scrutiny?
You seem unsure of what you are saying, like you are just making it up as you go. I wonder if you are not presuming to know a lot more about constitutional law than you really do, and trying to cover up your lack of knowledge with a lot of bluster.
Ironically, you are absolutely certain of what you're saying even though you are wrong.
Someone posted that marriage is not a right, so I posted proof that SCOTUS has said it is a fundamental right.
After I said that, you started going on about strict scrutiny, and because you're so determined to win the internets by finding something wrong with what I've said, you convinced yourself that somewhere along the way I claimed this matter will be decided on the basis of strict scrutiny. However, I never said that.
Throughout the thread, I have said that the bans will be overturned because the govt has no legitimate interest in banning SSM. If you don't believe me, go back and re-read my posts in this thread.
I'll wait :coffeepap: