Texas banned marriage

[AngusJS]

Originally Posted by August

That's a curious circular logic thang you've got going there...

How so? X = X according to the law of identity. Texas defined X, and then stated that they won't recognize it. You could use the same format for a law against money laundering, for example. So what's the problem?

[antikristuseke]

This is circular reasoning, not what Angus said.

[August]

Originally Posted by AngusJS

How so? X = X according to the law of identity. Texas defined X, and then stated that they won't recognize it. You could use the same format for a law against money laundering, for example. So what's the problem?

You're right. There should be an "other" between "any" and "legal".

[FIREWALL]

So What !!! Someday in California, you'll be able to marry your pet.

[antikristuseke]

Unless pets gain sentience, and thus overcome the bounds of pethood, not bloody likely

[Thomen]

Originally Posted by antikristuseke

Unless pets gain sentience, and thus overcome the bounds of pethood, not bloody likely

Meh... maybe. I remember a story from Switzerland, where they were looking into declaring PLANTS being sentient or to have dignity.
I need to look it up, though and make sure it was not just an April Fools..

Ahh.. here
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conten...5/065njdoe.asp

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by antikristuseke

Unless pets gain sentience, and thus overcome the bounds of pethood, not bloody likely

Sapience, pets (dogs and cats) are already sentient beings.

[nikimcbee]

Originally Posted by FIREWALL

So What !!! Someday in California, you'll be able to marry your pet.

Cool, I can finally come out of the kennel.

[AngusJS]

Originally Posted by FIREWALL

So What !!! Someday in California, you'll be able to marry your pet.

Seeing as how only adult humans can give consent or sign a contract, that'll never happen.