Saturday, May 20, 2006
I'm not sure I follow the argument
The next item tells of a judicial challenge by Massachusetts homosexual-rights activists to a proposed constitutional amendment to end same-sex "marriage." According to the Gay & Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD), the state constitution doesn't permit citizen-initiated amendments to reverse judicial rulings. Now that's a novel approach: A judicially created provision of the constitution is stronger than its original provisions and its legally adopted amendments. How could anyone present this argument with a straight face?
I'd like to comment on this, I really would. But I can't think of anything intelligent to say. Wow.
