Posted on 05/22/2004 1:53:09 PM PDT by wagglebee
Edited on 07/12/2004 4:15:29 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Maryland and Virginia will not recognize the "marriages" of area same-sex couples who are joining other homosexuals in flocking to Massachusetts to exchange vows, but D.C. officials are still deciding the issue.
Both states have laws defining marriage as being only the bonding of a man with a woman.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
And why doesn't Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney order the state executive departments and local governments to refuse to implement an illegal SJC decision. The court can order something to be done but it can't have the means to carry it out. The other branches of government can refuse to execute a decision that is unconstitutional and the rule of law applies no less to the courts than it does to the legislative and executive branches of the government. Besides, there's a separation of powers issue involved here.
Homphobic bigots!
Phase II is for judicial activists ("judges") to use "equal protection" to tell Virginia, Maryland what to do. "Federalism" has served its purpose.
| What We Can Do To Help Defeat the "Gay" Agenda |
|
|
| Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1) |
|
|
| Myth and Reality about Homosexuality--Sexual Orientation Section, Guide to Family Issues" |
Homosexual Agenda Ping - Note this statement, made by a homosexual who wants to "marry" (one of) his current sodomy buddy(s):
"This issue is not going to go away," Mr. Reeves said. "We need a better discourse to identify solutions that are acceptable to both sides. We don't want to rock the boat or make people uncomfortable, but to hopefully bring a more reasoned voice in the debate."
Lies, lies, lies.
The whole reason we are in this mess is because CONSERVATIVES LET IT HAPPEN. We didn't want to "rock the boat or make people uncomfortable", we wanted to be thought "reasonable" and didn't want to called "bigots, haters and homophobes".
Notice a connection between the WOT and the War on Marriage? You think making nice with Islamic jihadis will work? Or do they have to be quelled utterly because they want to destroy our lives? Do you think making nice with "gay" activists will work? Making nice means they want three steps, we only give them one or two. Then tomorrow they come back, want three steps, we only give them one or two.
I guarantee, if we don't see evil for what it is and put it back in the closet, in ten years child adult sex will be legalized "in special cases". Under the name of childrens' rights to self expression.
Let me know if anyone wants on/off this pinglist.
It's so bogus for "gay" radicals to talk about reason. It's nothing but 1984.
enjoyed your post.
I agree adult-child sex will be next. Didn't ancient Athens institutuionalize this? A boy got screwed by his teacher in return for an education?
Even years ago on CNN, a homo said he didn't "molest" children, he "loved" them.
Yes this will be taught as normal, especially teen-adult gay sex, as an "option", of course, in public schools, and any protest will be quashed, maybe they will have a hate-crime law against complaining about it.
Public schools? Better said as "government" schools. Un believeable that peoples' tax money used by liberal queer activists without recourse.
What are the chances of the Prez and the GOP making this a MAJOR campaign issue? Anyone care to guess?
Just because some idiot judges say up is down doesn't make it so. Marriage,whether common-law,church,temple or even Communist Soviet style has ALWAYS involved TWO genders, not one.
Might as well re-define night or day....wait Daylight Savings Time already does that....oh well,
One of the original platform planks (if it could be called that) at the original "Gay Rights" meetings in 1973 was ELIMINATION of all age of consent laws. Then they realized we weren't "ready" for that one, so they've worked on lowering it bit by bit. It's down to, I believe, 12 for boys in the Netherlands.
Sick, sick, sick. I am getting fighting mad.
You read or saw LOTR? Remember the Ents? We should all be Ents.
correct. these state initiatives won't matter once the SCOTUS tosses the federal defense of marriage act (and they will, the votes are there). and I do not think the constitutional amendment will succeed. the gays have won this battle (don't shoot the messenger). the votes just aren't there to stop them.
the suburban soccer moms do not want an amendment to stop gay marriage - the polls likely show that.
I think its unfair to blame Bush and the GOP for gay marriage. We should have a 5-4 against it on the SCOTUS, you cannot predict the future and stop judges from "flipping" once they get there. The liberal states like MA that are passing it within their states are certainly not under control of the GOP.
How are the federal agencies in Massachusetts handling this issue? The article says that the federal government does not recognize same-sex unions. What if a male postal worker in MA marries another man and then goes to his Personnel Office and asks to have his partner put on his health benefits form and life insurance.
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.