- Joined
- May 1, 2013
- Messages
- 119,717
- Reaction score
- 75,674
- Location
- Outside Seattle
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Independent
At a news conference Monday afternoon, Atty. Gen. Roy Cooper said he had made the decision because the appeals court ruling "predicts our law will be struck down."
"Simply put, it is time to stop making arguments we will lose and instead move forward, knowing that the ultimate resolution will likely come from the U.S. Supreme Court," Cooper said.
I also read somewhere today, though I don't remember where, that North Carolina is no longer going to defend their ban on SSM. Don't really know what that means except they aren't wasting tax payers' money. Are they going to recognize SSM or just not do anything til the ultimate USSC rulings???
Ah, here's the link.
North Carolina says it will no longer defend gay marriage ban in court - LA Times
One more state challenge has been denied. Virginia is the next in the ever-shortening list of states where gays may not marry.
Appeals court upholds decision overturning Virginia
"A federal appeals court on Monday struck down Virginia’s voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, saying that withholding the fundamental right to marry from gay couples is a new form of “segregation” that the Constitution cannot abide.
The 2-to-1 decision by a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, based in Richmond, upheld a lower court’s decision and extended an extraordinary winning streak in the federal courts for proponents of same-sex marriage.
"Legal challenges to state bans filed systematically nationwide have prevailed in every test since the Supreme Court in June 2013 struck down part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as only between a man and a woman."
Two federal appeals courts have now said the bans are unconstitutional. The Supreme Court probably will have to make the final determination and could consider the issue as soon as next year."
IMO, state governors and legislators should stop wasting their taxpayer money on challenging SSM....the handwriting has been on the wall for some time now.
Where is Agent J? I need him to post an updated list
A word to the wise: Don't count your USSC rulings before they are hatched. A majority that allows certain employers to prevent their employees' insurance from covering medical procedures and medications based on the employer's religious beliefs is certainly not a slam-dunk to uphold the constitutional protections of SSM.
I certainly have my fingers crossed that they do, and eliminate all this state-by-state bigotry once and for all... but I am not at all confident in this particular SCOTUS.
'Virginia’s voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage'
So, voters in Virginia voted to try and stop a consenting adult they will probably never know from marrying another consenting adult they will probably never know from marrying purely on the basis of some backwards, pathetic, dinosaur-like bigotry?
Judging by this ridiculousness then most Virginians must also be against antibiotics, electricity and telephones.
You must be a really young kiddie to think that it's "dinosaur like" bigotry to believe a marriage doesn't require one of each sex in order to be legitimate. There weren't any dinosaurs in the year 2001. Only in the last 14 years has the Oxymoron of homosexual marriage been practiced anywhere in the modern world. It's not that people don't want homosexuals to marry. It's that homosexuals don't seem interested in having sex with legitimate potential marriage partners.
I suppose soon enough homosexuals will be playing husband and wife all across the nation, though. I don't know why but it seems that any society that encourages rampant homosexuality doesn't last long after that happens. When in Rome, huh? Now if we lower the age of sexual consent for boys to be molested by men, we'll be taking another glorious step down the path of Rome. First things first, though. Got to make the oxymoron of homosexual marriage the law of the land in all 50 states in order to argue that homosexuality is as normal as heterosexuality first. Priorities. Must have priorities.
'Virginia’s voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage'
So, voters in Virginia voted to try and stop a consenting adult they will probably never know from marrying another consenting adult they will probably never know from marrying purely on the basis of some backwards, pathetic, dinosaur-like bigotry?
Judging by this ridiculousness then most Virginians must also be against antibiotics, electricity and telephones.
Even Barrack Obama was against SSM all up until just a few years ago so maybe these over-the-top characterizations are just a tad misplaced? The world is changing at a pace that some are having a difficult time keeping up with. Hating them for it is no better than them hating the change... and probably worse since the changes are supposedly rooted in tolerance and acceptance.'Virginia’s voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage'
So, voters in Virginia voted to try and stop a consenting adult they will probably never know from marrying another consenting adult they will probably never know from marrying purely on the basis of some backwards, pathetic, dinosaur-like bigotry?
Judging by this ridiculousness then most Virginians must also be against antibiotics, electricity and telephones.
A word to the wise: Don't count your USSC rulings before they are hatched. A majority that allows certain employers to prevent their employees' insurance from covering medical procedures and medications based on the employer's religious beliefs is certainly not a slam-dunk to uphold the constitutional protections of SSM.
I certainly have my fingers crossed that they do, and eliminate all this state-by-state bigotry once and for all... but I am not at all confident in this particular SCOTUS.
Virginia, Mother of Presidents. Died just alittle.
The closely linked interest of promoting moral principles is similarly infirm in light of Lawrence: “the fact that the governing majority in a State has traditionally viewed a particular practice as immoral is not a sufficient reason for upholding a law prohibiting the practice; neither history nor tradition could save a law prohibiting miscegenation from constitutional attack.” 539 U.S. at 577-78 (quoting Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186, 216 (1986) (Stevens, J., dissenting)) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also id. at 601 (Scalia, J., dissenting) (“But ‘preserving the traditional institution of marriage’ is just a kinder way of describing the State’s moral disapproval of same-sex couples.”). Preserving the historical and traditional status quo is therefore not a compelling interest that justifies the Virginia Marriage Laws.
You must be a really young kiddie to think that it's "dinosaur like" bigotry to believe a marriage doesn't require one of each sex in order to be legitimate. There weren't any dinosaurs in the year 2001. Only in the last 14 years has the Oxymoron of homosexual marriage been practiced anywhere in the modern world. It's not that people don't want homosexuals to marry. It's that homosexuals don't seem interested in having sex with legitimate potential marriage partners.
I suppose soon enough homosexuals will be playing husband and wife all across the nation, though. I don't know why but it seems that any society that encourages rampant homosexuality doesn't last long after that happens. When in Rome, huh? Now if we lower the age of sexual consent for boys to be molested by men, we'll be taking another glorious step down the path of Rome. First things first, though. Got to make the oxymoron of homosexual marriage the law of the land in all 50 states in order to argue that homosexuality is as normal as heterosexuality first. Priorities. Must have priorities.
I suppose soon enough homosexuals will be playing husband and wife all across the nation, though. I don't know why but it seems that any society that encourages rampant homosexuality doesn't last long after that happens. When in Rome, huh? Now if we lower the age of sexual consent for boys to be molested by men, we'll be taking another glorious step down the path of Rome. First things first, though. Got to make the oxymoron of homosexual marriage the law of the land in all 50 states in order to argue that homosexuality is as normal as heterosexuality first. Priorities. Must have priorities.
Even Barrack Obama was against SSM all up until just a few years ago so maybe these over-the-top characterizations are just a tad misplaced? The world is changing at a pace that some are having a difficult time keeping up with. Hating them for it is no better than them hating the change... and probably worse since the changes are supposedly rooted in tolerance and acceptance.
Why, do you think that gays are going to multiply? Are you unaware of the gay couples AND families that already live together 'all across the nation?'
But, do you think their numbers are just going to multiply like rabbits? How is homosexuality 'encouraged?' Either you are born gay or you are not. OF course anyone can participate in sex acts and straight men in prisons and straight couples often engage in those same sex activities. Doesnt make them gay.
Speaking of dinosaurs (lol), you do know that someone is gay whether they ever have sex or not?
It's odd that you bring in lowering the age of consent a) just for boys and b) at all. Are you suggesting that gays are pedophiles? That the engage in criminal behavior? And why only boys? Is it ok for lesbians to marry? Or you just dont see them as pedophiles? You have some very odd beliefs, I'd love to see them supported with sources before 'the sky falls!!!!'
The dirty little secret no one seems to be willing to talk about and every proponent of homosexuality will deny is that this fight isn't really about rights. It's about "normalization" of homosexuality. Asserting that homosexuality is just a normal lifestyle choice makes recruitment easier. Societies that sanction homosexuality end up with rampant homosexuality. I know many try to argue that homosexuality isn't a choice, but that argument is false because for many, if not all, it certainly is or was a choice. Moral decay is a pretty fast growing disease with some pretty serious consequences. This is just one more sign that the greatest days of this country are in our history already.
One more state challenge has been denied. Virginia is the next in the ever-shortening list of states where gays may not marry.
Appeals court upholds decision overturning Virginia
"A federal appeals court on Monday struck down Virginia’s voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, saying that withholding the fundamental right to marry from gay couples is a new form of “segregation” that the Constitution cannot abide.
The 2-to-1 decision by a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, based in Richmond, upheld a lower court’s decision and extended an extraordinary winning streak in the federal courts for proponents of same-sex marriage.
"Legal challenges to state bans filed systematically nationwide have prevailed in every test since the Supreme Court in June 2013 struck down part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as only between a man and a woman."
Two federal appeals courts have now said the bans are unconstitutional. The Supreme Court probably will have to make the final determination and could consider the issue as soon as next year."
IMO, state governors and legislators should stop wasting their taxpayer money on challenging SSM....the handwriting has been on the wall for some time now.
Where is Agent J? I need him to post an updated list
I think the term you're looking for is "moral equivalency" and, yes, I would agree that moral equivalency is at the root of it all.The dirty little secret no one seems to be willing to talk about and every proponent of homosexuality will deny is that this fight isn't really about rights. It's about "normalization" of homosexuality. Asserting that homosexuality is just a normal lifestyle choice makes recruitment easier. Societies that sanction homosexuality end up with rampant homosexuality. I know many try to argue that homosexuality isn't a choice, but that argument is false because for many, if not all, it certainly is or was a choice. Moral decay is a pretty fast growing disease with some pretty serious consequences. This is just one more sign that the greatest days of this country are in our history already.
Publicly. And when you're the President that's all that really matters because it all gets politicized, anyway.Politically or personally?
They are not wasting money, they are doing their jobs defending the laws of their state. The ones wasting money are those crying for the judicial activism and making us pay to defend the same law over and over and over again for the last four decades. A very small percentage of this country have cost the people billions because they want to play house like the heteros.
Publicly. And when you're the President that's all that really matters because it all gets politicized, anyway.
I think you're reading more into what I said than is actually there.Not really. Politically politicians want to get elected. Once in office, they can actually change their publicly stated positions and make a difference. Same might...is...happening on pot legalization IMO.
Besides, are you saying that people cant learn more and change their minds, legitimately?
"For the man that does not change his mind, is to say he is no wiser today than he was yesterday."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?