Judge Declares Ban on Gay Marriage Unconstitutional

[Defiant1]

But WHERE in the Constitution does it say GAY MARRIAGE IS LEGAL!?!?1/11/1/1/1// 12/1/2 1/oi2ho23h 0

<_>

It's just a matter of time, really.

It was slipped in between the right to murder babies before they are born and the right to healthcare.

It's in real small type so you have to look hard for it.

 

[Gunny]

Judge declares US gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional - Local News Updates - MetroDesk - The Boston Globe

July 8, 2010 06:55 PM

By Michael Levenson, Globe Staff

A federal district court judge in Boston today struck down the 1996 federal law that defines marriage as a union exclusively between a man and a woman.

Judge Joseph L. Tauro ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage law violates the Constitutional right of married same-sex couples to equal protection under the law and upends the federal government’s long history of allowing states to set their own marriage laws.

"This court has determined that it is clearly within the authority of the Commonwealth to recognize same-sex marriages among its residents, and to afford those individuals in same-sex marriages any benefits, rights, and privileges to which they are entitled by virtue of their marital status," Tauro wrote. "The federal government, by enacting and enforcing DOMA, plainly encroaches upon the firmly entrenched province of the state."

The judge would be wrong.

 

[bodecea]

Judge declares US gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional - Local News Updates - MetroDesk - The Boston Globe

July 8, 2010 06:55 PM

By Michael Levenson, Globe Staff

A federal district court judge in Boston today struck down the 1996 federal law that defines marriage as a union exclusively between a man and a woman.

Judge Joseph L. Tauro ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage law violates the Constitutional right of married same-sex couples to equal protection under the law and upends the federal government’s long history of allowing states to set their own marriage laws.

"This court has determined that it is clearly within the authority of the Commonwealth to recognize same-sex marriages among its residents, and to afford those individuals in same-sex marriages any benefits, rights, and privileges to which they are entitled by virtue of their marital status," Tauro wrote. "The federal government, by enacting and enforcing DOMA, plainly encroaches upon the firmly entrenched province of the state."

The judge would be wrong.

Not keen on states' rights, eh?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Judge declares US gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional - Local News Updates - MetroDesk - The Boston Globe

July 8, 2010 06:55 PM

By Michael Levenson, Globe Staff

A federal district court judge in Boston today struck down the 1996 federal law that defines marriage as a union exclusively between a man and a woman.

Judge Joseph L. Tauro ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage law violates the Constitutional right of married same-sex couples to equal protection under the law and upends the federal government&#8217;s long history of allowing states to set their own marriage laws.

"This court has determined that it is clearly within the authority of the Commonwealth to recognize same-sex marriages among its residents, and to afford those individuals in same-sex marriages any benefits, rights, and privileges to which they are entitled by virtue of their marital status," Tauro wrote. "The federal government, by enacting and enforcing DOMA, plainly encroaches upon the firmly entrenched province of the state."

The judge would be wrong.

Brilliant argument from our fearless leader.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Judge declares US gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional - Local News Updates - MetroDesk - The Boston Globe

July 8, 2010 06:55 PM

By Michael Levenson, Globe Staff

A federal district court judge in Boston today struck down the 1996 federal law that defines marriage as a union exclusively between a man and a woman.

Judge Joseph L. Tauro ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage law violates the Constitutional right of married same-sex couples to equal protection under the law and upends the federal government’s long history of allowing states to set their own marriage laws.

"This court has determined that it is clearly within the authority of the Commonwealth to recognize same-sex marriages among its residents, and to afford those individuals in same-sex marriages any benefits, rights, and privileges to which they are entitled by virtue of their marital status," Tauro wrote. "The federal government, by enacting and enforcing DOMA, plainly encroaches upon the firmly entrenched province of the state."

The judge would be wrong.

Not keen on states' rights, eh?

Our fearless leader is not keen on edjumacation.

 

[Yukon.]

Judge declares US gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional - Local News Updates - MetroDesk - The Boston Globe

July 8, 2010 06:55 PM

By Michael Levenson, Globe Staff

A federal district court judge in Boston today struck down the 1996 federal law that defines marriage as a union exclusively between a man and a woman.

Judge Joseph L. Tauro ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage law violates the Constitutional right of married same-sex couples to equal protection under the law and upends the federal government’s long history of allowing states to set their own marriage laws.

"This court has determined that it is clearly within the authority of the Commonwealth to recognize same-sex marriages among its residents, and to afford those individuals in same-sex marriages any benefits, rights, and privileges to which they are entitled by virtue of their marital status," Tauro wrote. "The federal government, by enacting and enforcing DOMA, plainly encroaches upon the firmly entrenched province of the state."

The judge would be wrong.

The judge is not wrong. US marriage laws are discriminatory and will be struck down by the USSC as such. You wont win on this one my friends. God's law will be broken but who cares? Abortion, divorce, state sanctioned murder - each is a sin but each is legal and is done daily.

The homos will marry and there's nothing you or anyone else can do about it.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Judge declares US gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional - Local News Updates - MetroDesk - The Boston Globe

July 8, 2010 06:55 PM

By Michael Levenson, Globe Staff

A federal district court judge in Boston today struck down the 1996 federal law that defines marriage as a union exclusively between a man and a woman.

Judge Joseph L. Tauro ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage law violates the Constitutional right of married same-sex couples to equal protection under the law and upends the federal government’s long history of allowing states to set their own marriage laws.

"This court has determined that it is clearly within the authority of the Commonwealth to recognize same-sex marriages among its residents, and to afford those individuals in same-sex marriages any benefits, rights, and privileges to which they are entitled by virtue of their marital status," Tauro wrote. "The federal government, by enacting and enforcing DOMA, plainly encroaches upon the firmly entrenched province of the state."

The judge would be wrong.

The judge is not wrong. US marriage laws are discriminatory and will be struck down by the USSC as such. You wont win on this one my friends. God's law will be broken but who cares? Abortion, divorce, state sanctioned murder - each is a sin but each is legal and is done daily.

The homos will marry and there's nothing you or anyone else can do about it.

no...but we can do something about lowlifes who molest little boys...

 

[mal]

Judge declares US gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional - Local News Updates - MetroDesk - The Boston Globe

July 8, 2010 06:55 PM

By Michael Levenson, Globe Staff

A federal district court judge in Boston today struck down the 1996 federal law that defines marriage as a union exclusively between a man and a woman.

Judge Joseph L. Tauro ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage law violates the Constitutional right of married same-sex couples to equal protection under the law and upends the federal government’s long history of allowing states to set their own marriage laws.

"This court has determined that it is clearly within the authority of the Commonwealth to recognize same-sex marriages among its residents, and to afford those individuals in same-sex marriages any benefits, rights, and privileges to which they are entitled by virtue of their marital status," Tauro wrote. "The federal government, by enacting and enforcing DOMA, plainly encroaches upon the firmly entrenched province of the state."

The judge would be wrong.

The judge is not wrong. US marriage laws are discriminatory and will be struck down by the USSC as such. You wont win on this one my friends. God's law will be broken but who cares? Abortion, divorce, state sanctioned murder - each is a sin but each is legal and is done daily.

The homos will marry and there's nothing you or anyone else can do about it.

No they won't...

There is Legal Precedent and it's not just Loving...

No Person of Consenting Age is being Denied Marriage in this Country.

A Small Percentage, not just Homosexuals, are being Denied the Ability to Redefine Marriage in Law.



peace...

 

[Bill O'Olberman]

The judge would be wrong.

The judge is not wrong. US marriage laws are discriminatory and will be struck down by the USSC as such. You wont win on this one my friends. God's law will be broken but who cares? Abortion, divorce, state sanctioned murder - each is a sin but each is legal and is done daily.

The homos will marry and there's nothing you or anyone else can do about it.

No they won't...

There is Legal Precedent and it's not just Loving...

No Person of Consenting Age is being Denied Marriage in this Country.

A Small Percentage, not just Homosexuals, are being Denied the Ability to Redefine Marriage in Law.



peace...

By your logic no one of consenting age prior to Loving v Virginia was being denied the ability to marry. Black people could marry black people and white people could marry white people; they both had the equal right to marry within their own race. Of course that clearly is an due process and equal protection violation. Homosexuals will eventually have state recognized marriages. It is inevitable.

 

[rightwinger]

The judge would be wrong.

The judge is not wrong. US marriage laws are discriminatory and will be struck down by the USSC as such. You wont win on this one my friends. God's law will be broken but who cares? Abortion, divorce, state sanctioned murder - each is a sin but each is legal and is done daily.

The homos will marry and there's nothing you or anyone else can do about it.

No they won't...

There is Legal Precedent and it's not just Loving...

No Person of Consenting Age is being Denied Marriage in this Country.

A Small Percentage, not just Homosexuals, are being Denied the Ability to Redefine Marriage in Law.



peace...

Haven't we already been down this path with race mixing laws?

You are not being denied the right to marry. You can still marry your own kind. You just can't marry the person you love......its not our fault that you love the wrong person

 

[mal]

The judge is not wrong. US marriage laws are discriminatory and will be struck down by the USSC as such. You wont win on this one my friends. God's law will be broken but who cares? Abortion, divorce, state sanctioned murder - each is a sin but each is legal and is done daily.

The homos will marry and there's nothing you or anyone else can do about it.

No they won't...

There is Legal Precedent and it's not just Loving...

No Person of Consenting Age is being Denied Marriage in this Country.

A Small Percentage, not just Homosexuals, are being Denied the Ability to Redefine Marriage in Law.



peace...

By your logic no one of consenting age prior to Loving v Virginia was being denied the ability to marry. Black people could marry black people and white people could marry white people; they both had the equal right to marry within their own race. Of course that clearly is an due process and equal protection violation. Homosexuals will eventually have state recognized marriages. It is inevitable.

A black man and white woman have the ability to procreate...

Race and sexually deviant choices are not analogous...



peace...

 

[Yukon.]

A black man and white woman have the ability to procreate...

Race and sexually deviant choices are not analogous...

...depends on what state you live in.

 

[bodecea]

The judge would be wrong.

The judge is not wrong. US marriage laws are discriminatory and will be struck down by the USSC as such. You wont win on this one my friends. God's law will be broken but who cares? Abortion, divorce, state sanctioned murder - each is a sin but each is legal and is done daily.

The homos will marry and there's nothing you or anyone else can do about it.

no...but we can do something about lowlifes who molest little boys...

Why have you left out little girls? Was it intentional? The reason I ask is because more girls are molested than boys every single day...by heterosexual males...most often by family members and family friends.

 

[ConHog]

Who gives a shit, thats what I can't figure out? let them get married......

 

[mal]

A black man and white woman have the ability to procreate...

Race and sexually deviant choices are not analogous...

...depends on what state you live in.

The hell it does...

Only a man and a woman can... regardless of state or race.



peace...

 

[Harry Dresden]

The judge is not wrong. US marriage laws are discriminatory and will be struck down by the USSC as such. You wont win on this one my friends. God's law will be broken but who cares? Abortion, divorce, state sanctioned murder - each is a sin but each is legal and is done daily.

The homos will marry and there's nothing you or anyone else can do about it.

no...but we can do something about lowlifes who molest little boys...

Why have you left out little girls? Was it intentional? The reason I ask is because more girls are molested than boys every single day...by heterosexual males...most often by family members and family friends.

Yukon likes the male variety.....girls im sure he finds disgusting....

 

[ConHog]

no...but we can do something about lowlifes who molest little boys...

Why have you left out little girls? Was it intentional? The reason I ask is because more girls are molested than boys every single day...by heterosexual males...most often by family members and family friends.

Yukon likes the male variety.....girls im sure he finds disgusting....

well that, and girls just aren't as available at the church of pedophilia. And even they were so disgusted by Yukon's disgusting habit of buggering little boys that they asked him to leave.

 

[Bill O'Olberman]

No they won't...

There is Legal Precedent and it's not just Loving...

No Person of Consenting Age is being Denied Marriage in this Country.

A Small Percentage, not just Homosexuals, are being Denied the Ability to Redefine Marriage in Law.



peace...

By your logic no one of consenting age prior to Loving v Virginia was being denied the ability to marry. Black people could marry black people and white people could marry white people; they both had the equal right to marry within their own race. Of course that clearly is an due process and equal protection violation. Homosexuals will eventually have state recognized marriages. It is inevitable.

A black man and white woman have the ability to procreate...

Race and sexually deviant choices are not analogous...



peace...

The issue is not that two people can or cannot procreate, the issue is two consenting adults inability to enter a government recognized contract based on what amounts to gender discrimination (I can marry a woman but another woman cannot have the same government contract with that woman and its benefits).

 

[ConHog]

By your logic no one of consenting age prior to Loving v Virginia was being denied the ability to marry. Black people could marry black people and white people could marry white people; they both had the equal right to marry within their own race. Of course that clearly is an due process and equal protection violation. Homosexuals will eventually have state recognized marriages. It is inevitable.

A black man and white woman have the ability to procreate...

Race and sexually deviant choices are not analogous...



peace...

The issue is not that two people can or cannot procreate, the issue is two consenting adults inability to enter a government recognized contract based on what amounts to gender discrimination (I can marry a woman but another woman cannot have the same government contract with that woman and its benefits).

You have no right to marry, PERIOD

That being said, let em marry who cares.

 

[Bill O'Olberman]

A black man and white woman have the ability to procreate...

Race and sexually deviant choices are not analogous...



peace...

The issue is not that two people can or cannot procreate, the issue is two consenting adults inability to enter a government recognized contract based on what amounts to gender discrimination (I can marry a woman but another woman cannot have the same government contract with that woman and its benefits).

You have no right to marry, PERIOD

That being said, let em marry who cares.

True. But as long as heterosexual couples have government recognized marriage it is a due process and equal protection rights violation to deny it to homosexuals (again it boils down to discrimination based on gender).

You might not care but, obviously, many people do.