>>120
There's a problem with reading comprehension here. It'll make explaining my point difficult but I'll try.

>Is this a typo? That's what it says
It's not a typo. There's a difference and >>121 pointed it out already although with unnecessary remark.

>The anti miscegenation position
Have you read the article? I made a direct refutation of it.

>You're just giving basic observations on the text.
And writer of the article missed those or feigned ignorance.

>One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you.
Again reading comprehension issues come in. Not "one law (...) unto him (...) and one unto the stranger(...)" but "one law (...)unto him (...) and unto the stranger(...)". That means they're under the same law from that point.