|
joether -> RE: Oklahoma! (1/16/2014 4:31:09 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: RacerJim
quote:
ORIGINAL: joether
Just like keeping one section of Americans from enjoying the benefits allowed through government, so to will the removal of gay marriage bans be removed. Its very ironic and amusing that these laws were placed by the very say people that are against government wasting money. How much money do you think has been spending creating, maintaining and defending these laws so far? Sort of removes those people's credibility doesn't it? The ruling by the judge is stayed pending an appeal (as the source from OP explains). However, given the results in EVERY state that has removed these silly laws, the ones in Oklahoma are not long to last.
Marriage is not just a religious component, but a legal one. So long as there is a legal component, it must be open to all US Citizens. It however does not force a particular church to hold a gay wedding if that is their view (since that is their freedom of religion).
This is, as the recent SCOTUS refusal to hear Utah's appeal proves, a State's rights issue. "We the people..." of Utah and Oklahoma, along with more than half the remaining States, LEGALLY voted for laws and, moreover, Amendments to the State's Constitution LEGALLY defining marriage as between a man and a woman and/or banning same-sex marriage. The SCOTUS, District Courts and Federal Judges are all part and parcel of the Federal government which the U.S. Constitution does not grant the authority to overrule a religious based State law/State Constitutional Amendment enacted by "We the people..." of any State.
Activist/progressive Judges have already ILLEGALLY (in violation of freedom of religion) forced particular churches, including military churches, to perform same-sex marriages despite those churchs' tenets/views against such.
'Activist Judges' is the junior high school terminology conservatives used when they don't get their way in America's court system. Sorry, but the United States is NOT a dictatorship for the conservative philosophy! Further, there are no 'metaphorical football games' in the court system. Every US Citizen is allowed to sue the government over grievances or when a situation by the government creates an uneven system between citizens (i.e. 1st Amendment). Those suing the state government are allowed to by the 1st amendment. And the judges must listen to what those suing have to say. The judge is still able to be independent when making a decision. Though when courts across the nation are striking down anti-gay marriage laws, they generally use the same reasoning.
You can vote in any law you want. However, whether that law is constitutional comes down to the argument(s) made in court for and against it. Which results in the decision from the judge. An the matter can be repealed all the way up to the US Supreme Court.
If you had actually taken some time to READ what I stated, I did point out that an individual church whom disagrees that homosexuals can be married can not be forced to hold such a union within their church. That doesn't seem to be stopping or slowing the locations gays and lesbians are using as the venue for their celebration in the states allowing such marriages. Those churches have lost money and followers because of this silly notion.
Finally if a state places a law on the books that is clearly created by serious religious motivations, it wont be to long before its struck down in the courts. Once the religious bullshit is removed from the anti-gay marriage laws, what is really left for the law to stand strong on? It clearly discriminates against one group of US Citizens. That is not allowed according to the definition of the US Constitution itself!
|
|
|
|
