Let me read this thread...
(3 mins later)
(Scoates, are you and Dookie constitutional lawyers or something?)
I get the point btwn you two though. jurisdiction, according to my understanding is the state or place which a particular government/ruler/political sovereign - call it what you want - has power over and they have the power therefore to rule and legislate.
(let me get back to the thread)
Now Dookie said:
"The issue was "jurisdiction," I guess. But since the gay marriages that took place in our great city of SF were ALL between consenting ADULTS, how is it possible for you to interpret that I also meant children? "
and that was correct also. Reading what went on, it seems that Dookie, went on the assumption that so long as there were consenting adults in this marraige - AND THEN ONLY will the government have NO right to govern who marries who when and how.
summary? The gov has no power govern UNLESS there are full age consenting sound minded adults AND with the exception of unacceptable marraiges eg: children or incestuous marraiges.
Therefore - both of you were correct. In a way, you both supplemented each other, without knowing it.
How is that?