Three to four frozen cosmos

No you don’t get what I’m trying to say.

I know, I’ve already said that in another post.

It definitely doesn’t work that way. But I can dream.

According to the post and the Guardian article, Justice Kagan will hear the case.

I wish this country could get its shit together, but I have no idea how it’s even possible at this point.

I didn’t mean it as a legal argument, just a line of questioning during arguments. Just as in the Hobby Lobby case, when Justice Sotomayer asked if the plaintiff’s claims had an actual religious basis and, if so, did they expand to staying away from products made of pork.

Not really. They asked specifics about religious beliefs during the Hobby Lobby case, like when Justice Sotomayer asked if the plaintiff’s claims had an actual religious basis and, if so, did they expand to staying away from products made of pork.

The Guardian article claims that Elena Kagan will hear the case, but likely deny the request for “asylum for her conscience” whatever that even means.

I still don’t understand how someone who has been married four times can say with a straight face that it undermines her religious beliefs to allow gay people to marry.

Lol

the pair...did not, like Davis, marry four times

They went on vacation together earlier this month, but they met a couple months ago.

Yeah his argument is essentially, “words can only have one meaning, so there.”

Yes, I got that. I still don’t see how that differs from what I said.

How will checking out his biography on his website tell me what his title is not?

And I didn’t kill them.

It’s better than the alternative, which is spending the rest of your life in prison.

What’s not his title?