Okay, so there's a valid legislative reason for them to have made this ruling, I can understand that, and honestly if it means that legislation comes up to make a change, then it's for the better. But their logic is so freaking twisted in the ruling...
Quote:
|
"For the welfare of children, it is more important to promote stability, and to avoid instability, in opposite-sex than in same-sex relationships,"... "The legislature could find that unstable relationships between people of the opposite sex present a greater danger that children will be born into or grow up in unstable homes than is the case with same-sex couples,"
|
So, because straight people are idiots and have children when they don't have the means or brains to care for them, we're not going to let gay people get married?!?! I'm dizzy that's so ridiculous.
And then there's this gem:
Quote:
|
And it ruled that a state legislature could also rationally conclude that "it is better, other things being equal, for children to grow up with both a mother and a father."
|
Based on what, exactly? Last I saw there wasn't a shred of research that indicates that.
Excuse me while I vomit.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13736236/