Thursday, September 27, 2007

The "Marriage Amendment" Redux?

A crank from UW-Oshkosh gets a curious concession.

A Dane County Circuit Court judge today ruled that a Door County man doesn't have the right to challenge a state constitutional amendment defining marriage on constitutional grounds, but left open the possibility he could be allowed to challenge it based on how it was presented to voters.

...However, Niess [the judge] directed both sides to provide more information on the question of whether the amendment was properly put to voters. McConkey is arguing that it wasn't because a constitutional amendment should only contain one subject, while this one contained several.

Nope. The single topic was gay "marriage," including any and all variations thereof by name or in fact.

And the "presentation" made by gay "marriage" supporters was blatantly fraudulent. Wouldn't it be fun if Judge Niess found that?


Billiam said...

Of course, I'll be surprised if the Judge does find that. Since most are far left, the judge will find a reason, real or imagined, to throw out the will of the people.

The Badgerland Conservative said...

I agree. I am predicting this vote will be thrown out by this lefty judicial activist. Homosexual marriage will be forced down the throats of decent Americans by black-robed mullahs.