You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Gay marriage’ tag.
While proponents of gay-marriage will frame any decision by the Supreme Court regarding marriage-equality (the PC term for Gay marriage) as a win, and a movement toward its full legalization, legal experts warn to the contrary. Of the ten cases that the Court can choose to hear during this session regarding this issue, the two that they are most like to take will be Windsor v. US, a Defense of Marriage Act case, and the California Proposition 8 case.
The Defense of Marriage Act
The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, recently has been struck down by two federal appeals courts, which means the Supreme Court is all but obligated to take at least one of the cases to settle the dispute between Congress and the courts. The case thought most likely to be picked up by the justices is Windsor v. United States, which challenges DOMA, a law passed by Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton in 1996 that prevents the federal government from recognizing same-sex married couples, even those in states that allow gay marriage.
The suit was brought by Edith Windsor, a resident of New York who paid $363,000 in estate taxes after her wife died because the federal government did not recognize their marriage. New York is one of nine states (and the District of Columbia) where gay marriage is legal, so Windsor argues that the federal government is discriminating against her by not recognizing her state-sanctioned marriage. (editor note: Ms. Windsor and her partner were married in Canada in 2007, but her partner died in 2009 in New York AFTER New York began recogonizing same sex marriages from other jurisdictions)
Windsor’s attorneys are not arguing, however, that marriage is a fundamental right that all Americans are entitled to, no matter their sexual orientation. And few experts expect the Supreme Court to make such a sweeping decision.
Court watchers think the Supreme Court also will take up Proposition 8, California’s gay marriage ban. Voters passed Prop. 8 in 2008 months after the state’s high court had legalized same sex unions and thousands of gay Californians had already tied the knot. Two federal courts have struck down Prop. 8 as discriminatory, leaving the Supreme Court to render a final judgment
The Prop. 8 case differs from the DOMA case in one key respect: In Prop. 8, the pro-gay marriage side is arguing that marriage is a fundamental right that should not be denied to people based on their sexual orientation. That means the Supreme Court, in theory, could issue a sweeping decision on Prop. 8 that legalizes gay marriage throughout the country and invalidates state gay marriage bans.
Geoffrey Stone, a law professor at the University of Chicago, thinks that’s unlikely. He says the justices will most likely wait for public opinion–which has just recently begun to swing in support of gay marriage–and state laws to coalesce around the issue before issuing a broad decision.
“The more this percolates, the easier it is to address this in the future,” Stone said.
In 3 states, in this past election, the VOTERS decided to permit same-sex marriage. In more than 30 States, the VOTERS have voted to the contrary, disapproving of the redifining of marriage. And the Courts have forced same-sex marriage on its citizens, and in some cases, like the Prop 8, did so AFTER the vote of the people. This issue will continue to be debated,and as Pastor Rick Warren has said, it is a welcomed debate if it is done so in the right forum and the right demeanor.
So the COUNTDOWN continues as the US Supreme Court’s latest session nears its end.
OBAMACARE was not among the Court decisions released this morning, but with just days left, the decision is forthcoming.
Over at the DOJ, AG Eric Holder haggles with Congress of the release of the documents relating to the botched “Fast and Furious” operation that has left AT LEAST ONE American dead as a result of the failure to monitor the operation properly.
Then there was Friday’s mid-afternoon political ploy, with Barack Obama circumventing the laws passed by Congress regarding the immigartion status of those who came here as children, albeit illegally. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) summed up the actions of the Democrats regarding comprehensive immigration reform by saying that when Obama had the House and the Senate, he did nothing on immigration, despite campaign promises. That is because Democrats DO NOT want immigration reform, because it makes good political fodder EVERY election. The President’s Friday Immigration ploy is just like his gay marriage “evolution”: PANDERING !!!
So WHAT SAY YOU!!!??
Madeleine McAulay, a sixteen-year-old Christian conservative from North Carolina, is speaking out today after receiving a litany of death threats and vile responses for publicly espousing her views on gay marriage.
After North Carolina voted to define marriage as being between a man and a woman, McAulay made a YouTube video in which she lamented the left trying to make it a “fresh” political issue, where she noted that it is actually the 31st state to do so.
I’m not going to lie. I was a bit shocked to hear how [Obama] came to his conclusion for his support of gay marriage.
That’s right, the president of the United States now looks to his young daughters to make major decisions– and what I don’t understand is that the president is being praised for listening to his young daughters and yet I, a sixteen-year-old, when I speak my mind I’m ridiculed by the left.
This makes no sense.
So let me just get this straight. If I‘m young and I give into the left’s agenda, I’m praised, but I‘m young and I’m conservative, I’m evil? Hm.
Now I want to be clear. I don’t hate gay people, so stop trying to say that I do. I simply believe that traditional marriage is the most productive way, and the Biblical way, to pursue a relationship…
Let’s be clear… this is not about homophobia, or gay rights, choice or nature.
In the 60′s and 70′s, there was the era of “free love”, and couples living together outside of marriage became a “lifestyle”. Those who by nature and those who choose the gay lifestyle are free in this country to do so. That does not mean, however, that every facet of life is then open to them.
Today, the federal judge in California ruled that the Prop 8 vote, wherein the citizens of California voted to ensure that marriage remained defined as between one man and one woman, was unconstitutional. In my mind, this was not unexpected. The judge has already issued a stay of his ruling so that no new same-sex marriages will occur, pending his review of his ruling in light of expected appeals.
Marriage was not defined by our founders, nor a right enshrined in the Constitution. Instead, marriage has been defined forever, in every culture, in every religion, in every ethnicity, as the union of one man and one woman. It is also noteworthy that the states that have approved gay marriage have done so either by a Court ruling or the legislature passing the law. In any state where the issue has been placed on the ballot, it has failed.
Genesis 2:24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.
Ephesians 5:31 FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND SHALL BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH
PORTLAND, Maine — Gay-marriage opponents are claiming victory in a closely watched referendum in Maine on a new state law that would have allowed same-sex couples to wed. The law in question was passed by the Legislature in May but never took effect because of a petition drive by conservatives. With more than 84 percent of precincts reporting Tuesday, the side seeking to repeal the law had 53 percent of the vote. Their campaign organizer, Frank Schubert, claimed victory and declared that Maine voters had helped preserve the institution of marriage. Gay-marriage supporters refused to concede, holding out hope that that the tide might turn as the final returns came in. They had been hoping Maine would become the first state to approve same-sex marriage at the ballot box.
UPDATE: The State of Washington is passing 51-49 their “Everything but Marriage” law, which gives same-sex couples/ domestic partnership all state granted rights and benefits that married couples have. The repeal of the Maine same-sex marriage law makes Maine the 31st state to, by popular vote, oppose same-sex marriage, or define in their Constitutions that marriage is between one man and one woman. The five states that permit same-sex marriages do so by acts of the Legislature or by Court order. Maine shows that the legislators are not necessarily legislating based on the voice of their constituency.
The City Council of the District of Columbia is poised to permit gay marriages, despite the fact that the majority of the District do not support the move. Knowing that the Council has a mjority for the move, the Council is warning its residents that they had better not address their concerns to the District’s overseers: The United States Congress.
This past week, DC city council member Jack Evans vehemently warned DC citizens that if they took their concerns about marriage to Capitol Hill there would be grave “consequences.” Knowing that he and his colleagues have garnered the votes they need to pass a same-sex marriage law in DC, he thought that he would flex his political muscles. After repeating his threats in several different ways he summarized the essence of his warning, “Proceed at your own peril.”