Aristotle maintained that women have fewer teeth than men although he was twice married it never occurred to him to verify this statement by examining his wives' mouths.

It is necessary for him who lays out a state and arranges laws for it to presuppose that all men are evil and that they are always going to act according to the wickedness of their spirits whenever they have free scope.

States are as the men they grow out of human characters.

Nothing can be more absurd than the practice that prevails in our country of men and women not following the same pursuits with all their strengths and with one mind for thus the state instead of being whole is reduced to half.

Was this an old disease and if so which one? If it was new what did that say about the state of medical knowledge? And in any case how could physicians make sense of it?

The logic is often far-fetched - how does medical marijuana affect interstate commerce? - and some conservatives would like judges to start throwing out federal laws wholesale on commerce clause grounds. The court once again said no thanks.

Although awareness of cancer's prevalence in the United States improves and medical advances in the field abound pancreatic cancer has largely been absent from the list of major success stories.

Medical decisions have been politicized. What doctor wants a state legislator in his consulting room?

In our own state we came up with I think what was a very novel approach to closing the gap on the uninsured. To harmonize medical records - which was a major step in getting costs out of the system.

But I contend that if we're providing total medical coverage for every man woman and child in Iraq shouldn't we at least be doing the same thing for every man woman and child in the United States?

Against the State against the Church against the silence of the medical profession against the whole machinery of dead institutions of the past the woman of today arises.

Marriage has been defined by every legislature that has ever sat in the United States from every State now 50 States the same way but now we have unelected judges altering and changing that fundamental institution.

The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly held that marriage is one of the most fundamental rights that we have as Americans under our Constitution.

The activists will not stop in trying to impose their extreme views on the rest of us and they have now plotted out a state-by-state strategy to increase the number of judicial decisions redefining marriage without the voice of the people being heard.

In response to our fast-food culture a 'slow food' movement appeared. Out of hurried parenthood a move toward slow parenting could be growing. With vital government supports for state-of-the-art public child care and paid parental leave maybe we would be ready to try slow love and marriage.

There are more than 30 states who either by statute or constitutional amendment have defined marriage as being between a man and a woman.

I'm knocking our pitiful pathetic lawmakers. And I thank God that President Bush has stated we need a Constitutional amendment that states that marriage is between a man and a woman.

The state's interest in marriage is stability. Generally speaking polygamy does not work for stability. Inherent in the whole polygamous movement is a deep and abiding misogyny and denigration of women. So polygamy is objectionable on lots of grounds.

I think that every state in the union should recognize same-sex marriage.

Marriage has historically been in the domain of the States to regulate.

Second marriage is an issue that our Founding Fathers wisely left to the states.

Let me first state that I believe that marriage is a sacred union between one man and one woman.

Forty-five States as the gentleman just said have determined by people that were elected by the people of that State that marriage is the definition of one man and one woman.

So far 44 States or 88 percent of the States have enacted laws providing that marriage shall consist of a union between a man and a woman. Only 75 percent of the States are required to approve a constitutional amendment.