Mass. Supreme Court Rules - Gay Couples have the Right to Marry

FoxNews | 11-18-03 | FoxNews

[Bronco_Buster_FweetHyagh]

Mass. Supreme Court rules that illegal for state to deny marriage license to gay couples.

[Guenevere]

#54..The states that passed the Defense of Marriage Act...but I too, don't know which states that includes.

[AppyPappy]

Good point. If a man is in a loving relationship with a Cub Scout troop, who are we to say it is illegal?

[microgood]

The court ruled 4-3, ordering the Legislature to come up with a solution within 180 days.

They have authority over the legislature? This sounds wrong. If I were the legislature I would ignore them. But it sounds like they know their limits and are exceeding their authority.

[prairiebreeze]

Actually it will be the divorce lawyers.

And I assert again the lawyers assoc are in full support and lobbying this.

Prairie

[cajungirl]

It is unique and amazing and quite wonderful. Noone said it wasn't. Others just want to imitate it, a sad thing in an of itself. But the best they can aspire to, to promise to love, honor and cherish. What would you have them do?

[Semper Paratus]

Democrats' 2004 nominating convention in Boston, July 26 - 29.

This is a big political opportunity. Bush has taken the right side in this issue. The 'rat candidates are going to have take a stand for or against this ruling, there is no weasle room now.

[freedomcrusader]

Amen to that. The court can't force the legislature to do anything. What are they going to do, ask the executive branch to throw them all in jail?

Of course, the sheep in the legislature and executive branch are too dumb to just ignore the court.

[jwalsh07]

The Defense of Marriage Act in every state will be ruled unconstitutional if SCOTUS decides to expand on Lawrence.

There is only one way to stop this march and that is by Constitutional Amendment or by Congress passing a law telling the SCOTUS to stay the hell out of the marriage business which they are authorised to do under Article 2 Section 2 of the US Constitution.

[Aquinasfan]

When do we get to abort the state of Mass....

I'm willing to go down with the ship if it will save our country. Damn.

[netmilsmom]

That is so scary.

[Guenevere]

#148..Thanks for clarifying.....I was afraid of that!
I know you speak the truth.

[ken5050]

cg...the point is that marriage is first and foremost an institution of religion..developed to forge a family bond to enable children to be raised in a stable environment...it was adopted by government....attempts now to co-opt marriage debase its original meaning and intent..civil unions work fine...

[RansomOttawa]

What's wrong with giving them privileges that will allow them to be functioning members of society just like everyone else?

Homosexuals do not need to "marry" other homosexuals in order to be "functioning members of society."

[GeronL]

The 'rat candidates are going to have take a stand for or against this ruling, there is no weasle room now

Oh, they'll find room to weasel!!

"We have yet to begun to weasel!"

[Aquinasfan]

the point is that marriage is first and foremost an institution of religion..

Yes, but it's also a part of the natural order, and the state of the State depends on the state of the family. As the family goes, so goes the State.

[Graybeard58]

The only thing that can stop it is a Constitutional Amendment.

You are probably right and that's sad that we have to add to the constitution to accomplish what the framers of that document didn't even consider. If they had pondered for another hundred years before writing that document they would not have dreamed that society would ever sink to that level of decadence.

Before long we may be pushing for a constitutional amendment banning sex between adults and children--If Nambla and the ACLU has their way.

[Dr.Zoidberg]

Or three weasels, a man and a bottle of extra virgin olive oil.

[xzins]

What would I have them do? Repent and be baptized would be what I'd prefer.

Other than that they need to get a general power of attorney that will grant them access to every little legal concern they have about the affairs of their buddies.

Any state financial advantage or incentive given married couples in the form of my tax money has no place in their pockets.

That incentive is not based on where someone gets his/her orgasm, it's based on being the potential home of the next generation. These folks contribute absolutely nothing to that process.

It is civil disobedience time.

[jwalsh07]

Hawaii, a liberal state, overturned their Supreme Court by constitutional amendment when thet HSC, in direct contravention of the will of the people, ruled homosexual "marriage" Constitutional.

California, another liberal state, passed a referundum overwhelimingly defining marriage as between a man and a woman. If those states are a bellweather, a Marriage amendment will sail through.

[cajungirl]

I sort of agree with you, civil unions would do the same thing. but it seems to me that the issue that is being ignored is that no religion can be required to marry someone. Shouldn't the religious denominations be the ones to say they won't do this if it violates their beliefs. Now I agree marriage is good for the state, for children, for society. I just don't see how allowing gays to marry really debases marriage. Haven't we ordinary mortals done that pretty handily ourselves what with divorce, infidelity, etc. I wonder if gay marriage might be beneficial for society when you look at the single gay life,,surely monogamy and fidelity would be better than say bathhouse sex. Marriage certainly civilizes men and curbs their jungle like behavior {sorry guys},,could it not do the same for gay men. I just wonder if saying gay marriage debases marriage is a bit like saying I have the finest house in town, noone else can have anything else close to mine in structure as it will debase mine. It seems ungenerous somehow.