The Slippery Slope of "A Moral Issue" ...

[_moksha]

The letter was not read in my congregation today. I wonder how many other bishops elected to not read it?

Harmony, do you live in California?

[_The Nehor]

Nehor, have you noticed that this is a pretty heady discussion, but when it doesn't in some way involve putting down Mormons it doesn't attract most posters?

This is not a matter of applying the law fairly which is the main function of the judicial system.

I thought it was saying that the law had been allowed to provide such a glitch, that it could not be applied fairly and so the application of the law itself must be struck down.

Yeah, I noticed that too.

I think the decision was just but that it wouldn't have been needed if previous judicial decisions hadn't been so bad (Plessy v. Ferguson for example).

[_moksha]

Nehor, have you noticed that this is a pretty heady discussion, but when it doesn't in some way involve putting down Mormons it doesn't attract most posters?

This is not a matter of applying the law fairly which is the main function of the judicial system.

I thought it was saying that the law had been allowed to provide such a glitch, that it could not be applied fairly and so the application of the law itself must be struck down.

Yeah, I noticed that too.

I think the decision was just but that it wouldn't have been needed if previous judicial decisions hadn't been so bad (Plessy v. Ferguson for example).

Perhaps we could postulate that the size of the barb against Mormonism, directly influences the rate of participation (with the exception of harpooning apologists).

So Nehor, if a decision can be just based on previous bad decisions, does this have bearing upon the California case to allow gay marriage?