Supremes refuse challenge to Massachusetts gay marriage law

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a case challenging the right of same-sex couples to marry in Massachusetts.

[...]

The plaintiffs wanted the U.S. Supreme Court to invalidate the 2003 Massachusetts ruling. But Lambda Legal, a homosexual advocacy group, said it's not surprised that the Supreme Court refused to weigh-in on the Massachusetts ruling.

[...]

"This decision highlights the need for an amendment to the United States Constitution protecting marriage and defining it as the union of one man and one woman. Marriage will be defined by someone," said Mathew Staver, president and general counsel of Liberty Counsel.

"I would rather have it defined by the people of the United States instead of the judiciary," added Staver. "This battle is far from over. The Constitution should protect the citizens of Massachusetts from their own state Supreme Court's usurpation of power."

"Today's sidestep by the Supreme Court further illustrates the need for a national definition of marriage," said Focus on the Family Founder and Chairman Dr. James C. Dobson.

CNS article

I think I see a brainless head-to-brainless head coming up between the Oaf of Office and the people who gave him his "mandate".

"Only an amendment to the U.S. Constitution will allow every citizen's voice to be heard. America cannot afford a patchwork definition of marriage, with courts and local officials redefining it at will," he added.

"This nation must have a clear and unified standard of its foundational institution - the amendment process is the only foolproof method of protecting marriage for all Americans," Dobson concluded.

Mullah Dobson doesn't hear himself, does he? Or else he considers gays neither citizens or Americans.