I am dismayed to see that you have so little respect for those who might read here as to cavalierly expect them to make unwarranted assumptions about what are your opinions, and what you offer as statements from authority.
I am no exception to your idiotic rule, i just don't assume that everyone automatically makes such assumptions--and with good reason. This is a site at which people debate issues, and the issue of judicial activitism is a very appropriate issue in the discussion of same sex marriage in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts--where the State Supreme Court has authorized such marriages, and where the Legislature has just inferentially concurred by refusing to authorize a referendum on the issue. (Of course, in practical politics, if that is actually one of your less than politically popular actions by the Legislature, they'll pay the price at the ballot box.)
Given that this is a site for such debates, and that there are a wide variety of people reading here, many of whom may not know you at all, and therefore have no good reason to assume that you simply offer opinion when you haven't so identified it, i thought it would be useful both to make the point, and do demonstrate the feeble basis upon which such opinions are based when offered in such a manner.
So, as you see, i can be as insultingly snotty about your unsubstantiated opinions as you can in attempting to suggest that i'm not bright enough to notice when you're just shooting your mouth off.
GREGORY:
Under the terms of the Roman occupancy, we're entitled to be crucified in a purely Jewish area.
PHARISEE:
Pharisees separate from Sadducees.
WELSH MAN:
And Swedish separate from Welsh.
