Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ZOT!! Overturned Same-Sex Marriage Ban is a Win for Freedom
The Woodward Report ^ | August 4, 2010

Posted on 08/04/2010 3:44:08 PM PDT by thisisthetime

When a San Francisco Federal Judge ruled the ban on same –sex marriage (enumerated by Proposition 8) unconstitutional today it was a big win for freedom in the United States. No longer will the issue be one that it is determined on a state by state basis, but the issue will eventually be enshrined in federal law pending the eventual Supreme Court decision.

The current ruling will be appealed in the 9th Circuit, but regardless of the outcome you can be assured this case will be heard by the highest court in the land. The question is – What will be their verdict? Proposition 8, which accumulated 52.3% of the vote, was deemed unconstitutional because of its infringement on the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th amendment.

Another interesting twist to the story is the man who made the decision, Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, is himself gay. Regardless of his orientation, which the San Francisco Gate claims had no affect on the outcome, I believe this is the correct decision and hope that the United States Supreme Court concurs when given the chance.

As editor-in-chief of The Woodward Report I identify myself heavily with conservative politics. I am certain that by agreeing with the verdict rendered I am in the minority among conservatives. However, the reality is that there is no legitimate argument that outlines why same-sex marriage should be banned. No one can argue with a straight face that it will diminish the sanctity of marriage. The divorce rate among Americans is estimated to be between 40% - 50%. It is clear that a lot of people do not take marriage very seriously...

(Excerpt) Read more at thewoodwardreport.com ...


TOPICS: Government; Politics; Religion; Society
KEYWORDS: democrats; gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; prop8; sodomyrus; thehomoreport; zot; zotbait; zotmedaddy; zuluoscartango
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last
To: thisisthetime

It may be a ‘win’ for freedom, but it is a definite loss for those of us who are totally, completely, and utterly creeped out by deviant, sick, and utterly depraved behavior.

Gays always have and always will turn my stomach. There is no law, no judicial ruling, and no court order that can EVER make me accept them.


41 posted on 08/04/2010 4:40:21 PM PDT by hoagy62 (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thisisthetime

“Overturned Same-Sex Marriage Ban is a Win for Freedom”
No, it is a win for evil. It is opening the door for polygamists and pedophiles to become legitimate on the same grounds as the queers. It is also a win for evil because the will of the people was ignored and a decree from a single unelected individual took its place. There is no good in this.


42 posted on 08/04/2010 4:46:01 PM PDT by GenXteacher (He that hath no stomach for this fight, let him depart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: squarebarb
I'm going to start hyperventilating soon.

"But would not the SC rule on whether a federal judge can overturn a state proposition?

IT DOESN'T MATTER! If we allow ourselves to be drawn into arguments on this issue about states rights or constitutionality or whatever, then the left has won! That's exactly what they want because then we have essentially stipulated to their contention that the definition of marriage is malleable and can cover any arrangement anyone happens to fancy. To do that is to fight the wrong battle.

The correct response to them is to force the plaintiffs in this case (the left) to produce evidence that the term "marriage" can be extended to same-sex unions. THEY CAN'T! There is no case-law precedent, no historical precedent, nor any other evidence whatsoever that the term means anything other than the union of a man and a woman. I just can't believe that they have essentially waltzed into a courtroom and arbitrarily redefined the critical word in the case with zero legal backing, gotten the judge to go along with it, and then succeeded in getting the conservative opposition to argue about whether it's constitutional or whether it violates the equal protection clause.

Come on, this one isn't difficult.

43 posted on 08/04/2010 4:46:01 PM PDT by noiseman (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: thisisthetime

I’m sure NAMBLA is just waiting for their freedom next..

There’s some sick, sick bastards we have in society..


44 posted on 08/04/2010 4:46:39 PM PDT by maddog55 (OBAMA, Why stupid people shouldn't vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thisisthetime; Olog-hai; y'all
Separation of church and state? what does that have to do with anything? people can married at a court house....Not in the US Constitution. It's in the Constitution of the Soviet Union, though:

As far as I'm concerned, "Separation of Church and State" is a liberal invention, and I'd only use it to throw it back in their face.

Then again, why the hell CAN you get married in a court house? Marriage IS a tenet of religion.

while there is no right to marry, there is the 14th amendment which promises equal protection under the law

All that means is a gay guy would have as much right to marry a woman as does the next guy....if it was a right.

45 posted on 08/04/2010 4:52:01 PM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate: Republicans freed the slaves Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: windsorknot

They only want “marriage” because they do not have it - give it a few years and they’ll be fighting like hell to get out of it... It is different when you break up and the other person can take half your stuff. They will figure it out eventually.


46 posted on 08/04/2010 4:53:28 PM PDT by nolongerademocrat ("Before you ask G-d for something, first thank G-d for what you already have." B'rachot 30b)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: thisisthetime

“Marry” your boyfriend while you can.


47 posted on 08/04/2010 4:53:46 PM PDT by Jacquerie (We live in a judicial tyranny - Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: thisisthetime
There is already "equal protection under the law" when it comes to marriage, strictly and traditionally defined. As a man you are free to marry a woman, and as a woman you are free to marry a man.
48 posted on 08/04/2010 4:55:58 PM PDT by windsorknot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: thisisthetime

Minority rule once again trumps majority rule...... =.=


49 posted on 08/04/2010 4:56:34 PM PDT by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER
"All that means is a gay guy would have as much right to marry a woman as does the next guy....if it was a right."

Finally someone is zeroing in on the real issue. I might not hyperventilate after all, although I still have my paper bag handy since everyone else is still arguing over the placement of the deck chairs while the ship goes down.

50 posted on 08/04/2010 4:58:12 PM PDT by noiseman (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: thisisthetime
... the government should not have an opinion in matters of morality except when it infringes upon other’s liberty.

Which government? Certainly not the US government.

The original 13 colonies were RELIGIOUS enclaves with their own religious preference community. They DID NOT want a federal government imposing a state religion on them.

That's why freedom of religion is in the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

51 posted on 08/04/2010 4:58:30 PM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate: Republicans freed the slaves Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: thisisthetime
Overturned Same-Sex Marriage Ban is a Win for Freedom

Wrong. This ruling is tyrannical, and inimical to freedom.

Why? Because American liberty is predicated on the natural law, and this lawless court opinion violates it.

It is in every way destructive of our republican form of government.

This opinion is wickedness showing its ugly face for all the world to see.

52 posted on 08/04/2010 5:00:46 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (They say money is the mother's milk of politics, but it's not. It's one hundred proof corn liquor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thisisthetime

"Daisy, there is hope for us yet!

53 posted on 08/04/2010 5:05:36 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thisisthetime

What argument? Did you think I posted one? It was an observation. Do you want me to take the time to deconstruct this feeble argument? Isn’t it obvious how bad this was?


54 posted on 08/04/2010 5:16:48 PM PDT by IrishCatholic (No local Communist or Socialist Party Chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: thisisthetime
explain how equal protection under the law is not violated by refusing to allow same-sex couples to marry (which is a government sanctioned process) ?

All people have the right to get married, no one is denied that right. There is equal protection under the law. They simply have to marry someone of the opposite sex. If you see that as denying a right, something is wrong with your brain.

55 posted on 08/04/2010 5:22:06 PM PDT by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: greene66

I’ll be joining you. If we have to have armed conflict, we will need to secede.


56 posted on 08/04/2010 6:39:40 PM PDT by fwdude (Anita Bryant was right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Three pro-homo-nazi agenda bannings so far that I’ve seen, today.

Excellent.


57 posted on 08/04/2010 7:19:47 PM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

That poor darling little girl.

:-(


58 posted on 08/04/2010 7:20:09 PM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: thisisthetime

Most black people are rightfully insulted to have their race equivalent with people of the same sex who voluntarily sodomize each other.


59 posted on 08/04/2010 7:22:08 PM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: thisisthetime; 230FMJ; 50mm; A.Hun; abigailsmybaby; AFPhys; Aircop_2006; AliVeritas; Allegra; ...
Fail

Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my Viking Kitty/ZOT ping list!. . . don't be shy.

60 posted on 08/04/2010 7:30:06 PM PDT by darkwing104 (Lets get dangerous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson