Nutramax Dog Food Cupon

See: gay marriage and unions are not comparable to the Pope

New campaign to stop pressing the Constitutional Court of the gay movement to obtain recognition of same-sex marriage through the courts. Consultation with a decision taken on December 16 and filed yesterday with an order (the fourth in 2011), states in fact very clearly what has already been established in a decree of a court order in April and July of 2010 states, that is, that can not be regarded as unconstitutional the provisions of the Civil Code do not allow marriage between persons of the same sex.
A further proof, then, programmatic insistence that homosexual activism can not change the meaning of the law when it meets the true meaning of the rules. It should be noted that the decision of the court of Ferrara to make inquiries of the Consulta, in December 2009, concerning the request to marry a lesbian couple, was triumphalist commentary from a gay site organized: "The campaign continues to claim civilian." Further down the appeal to all lesbians and gay men to apply for publication of banns, and then you can appeal the denial. But with yesterday's order, the Court held, in terms of Article 2 of the Constitution which recognizes the inviolable rights of the individual and social sphere, "inadmissible" to the question of the legality of the articles of the Civil Code stipulating that the Marriage is only between a man and a woman. The claim brought by lesbian couple is inadmissible because the ordinance says, "seeking a preliminary additive not constitutionally required." 'Unfounded' was then considered the question of constitutionality of Article 3 in respect of our fundamental charter, the equality of all citizens before the law, called In their rules of the Civil Code, together with 29, which recognizes the family as a natural society.
In other words, the "court of law" it is indisputable that the Constitution is the only possible marriage between a man and a woman. In ruling in March called in order for yesterday it was stated that the constitutional principles must be interpreted taking into account the evolution of society, but not to the point that "affect the core of the rule, modified so as to include phenomena and problems in it are not considered when it was enacted. " The order said yesterday, then, that 'Article 29 of the Constitution refers to the concept of marriage as defined by the Civil Code as a union between persons of different sex, and this meaning of the constitutional precept can not be overcome by hermeneutics' also "so that homosexual unions can not be considered homogeneous to the marriage." In conclusion, since the union between two homosexuals is in no way comparable to marriage between a man and a woman, there can be no discrimination in the fact that our system does not provide for gay marriage. Significantly, then, the fact that the order be published Yesterday, in contrast to the preceding sentence, is not invoked at all, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In fact it is erroneous to believe that this document extends Community competence, and prejudice to the law relating to marriage solely the purview of national laws.

(Source: Pier Luigi Fornari, events, January 6, 2011)