Should same sex marriage be legal?

Let me just defend the United States Constitution real quick here be restating the question asked Constitutionally, and not by human right. This simply for no other reason that I have been accused of being Gay without any judicial separation. Are you saying honestly that perjury in a court of law, in writing, on legal document should be legal? That when signed under false pretense, illegally it should be legal any-way?

Or are you saying if the crime is just too complicated to be found affordably in a court of law, it should be legislated as legal so money can be spent elsewhere in the general welfare?

I am answering the question. No. The crime of perjury takes place as marriage has a legal past to establish a public identity to be seen by all. As a form of public record it is an official license document. There is a declaration to form by creation of posterity to the general welfare. (Meaning have child, who would be a citizen of a community.) And a self-value to be publicly abused.

The fastest way to address perjury is if the person committing the crime of perjury admits to the crime. So.” I am the person lying, as witness, do confess to the crime of perjury made. As a witness on official document the license issued for public observation is wrong that I make.”

In order to correct my lie on official document I would make a separation of fact that either two men, or two woman, will be observed in the most impartial way I can describe. So it may be shared publicly without forcing the lie into the legal process of likely-hood, to be held on official document of record.

I commend you on your feelings of Marriage, but must say as a reminder to civil Right that the use in this way of the word Marriage is an open act of plagiarizing held in recorded by the civil court, because the civil judicial system could not address the legal representation issue that was placed in question. Binivir, UnosMulier, or Marriage?

For the recorded only one of these accounts holds legal precedent of state licensing to create posterity under that license process.

I didn’t say marriage was wrong between all those who are devoted to each other. What is said is the legal condition of marriage has a naturel limit as common defense to the general welfare of a united State. Past that limit of common defense it becomes a crime when used as a witness statement.

This is not an opinion it is fact. The issue is you are ignoring fact that the crime that is created can be confessed and is not just an accusation to the wrong as crime. Again you are to have me commit perjury. I am guilt! So; to correct my crime immediately, I must know a witness account to use that is legal. Are those in the likely-hood two men, or two woman. Ones is Unos Mulier for woman, the other is Binivir for two men.  

An opinion, on this matter at this time might be this is a Religious Test to hold political office. For it requires an answer that is not common knowledge to the general welfare. By the way you are not doing my work. Marriage is set in legal precedent to a prediction of a procreating couple’s possible posterity. You know that word?  It is use in the United States Constitution. There is a medical license already granted for the creation of life by In Vitro condition. This also may be described as an opinion but is not, it is fact.

I like those answers as they do not require a public plagiarism of a united state of religion.