I don't, specifically, see how the Judge's focal points come down on the larger issue (Pizer quote). Do I just not speak legaleze very well? Or is this court already not really looking at the important aspects?
Well, the fundie clowns are going to try to pretend that there's a legitimate secular purpose behind banning gay marriage, rather than admitting that they're driven solely by hatred of their neighbor and a desire to appease the imaginary wrath of their imaginary god. They have to. They can't just come out and say: "the pursuit of happiness be damned, my imaginary friend
really hates fags."
I predict that their perjury on this subject will make
Kitzmiller v. Dover look like a truth-telling contest.
™ Version 4.2
