Skip to comments.
Gay couple can't contest marriage definition
San Francisco Chronicle ^
| 5/5/6
| Bob Egelko
Posted on 05/05/2006 12:48:15 PM PDT by SmithL
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-30 last
To: pray4liberty
This is such a game of ping-pong between the courts. We need a Federal Marriage Protection Act to settle the matter. Yes, for the good of the country it would be nice to settle the matter -much like President Ford did with the Nixon pardon. The homosexual activists and ACLU have had their 15 minutes -time for the country to move on...
21
posted on
05/05/2006 5:14:00 PM PDT
by
DBeers
(†)
To: DBeers
To: SmithL
Incredible! *LOGIC* out of the 9th Circus. Makes perfect sense, really.
23
posted on
05/05/2006 6:04:36 PM PDT
by
newzjunkey
(Don't use illegals: HIREPATRIOTS.COM)
To: pray4liberty
Don't agree. Secular "marriage" should remain a state's rights concern.
I've wondered by the left hasn't tried to get Roe vs Wade into a Constitutional Ammendment. Maybe they know it won't pass?
24
posted on
05/05/2006 6:08:26 PM PDT
by
newzjunkey
(Don't use illegals: HIREPATRIOTS.COM)
To: SmithL
is there an error? It says Ninth Circuit ?
25
posted on
05/05/2006 6:10:55 PM PDT
by
EDINVA
To: EDINVA
The 9th circus ALWAYS has an agenda.
26
posted on
05/05/2006 6:20:59 PM PDT
by
SmithL
(Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.)
To: SmithL
The ninth circus has an agenda indeed. Note:
"The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reached the result urged by gay-rights groups"
This was the ruling "urged" by gay activists. It's just a step toward their goal.
27
posted on
05/06/2006 8:51:09 AM PDT
by
gidget7
(PC is the huge rock, behind which lies hide!)
To: SmithL
saying a couple that isn't legally married under state law has no right to contest the federal definition of marriage. LOL! Whether statutory (federal) law OR civil (State) law, no governmental entity has the authority (juristiction) to define marriage as ANYTHING other than a marriage between a man and a woman.
All political entities and subdivisions MUST remain true to natural law-
This law of nature, being coeval with mankind and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other-It is binding over all the globe in all countries, and at all times; no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this: and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original.
From Blackstone's Commentaries Book I Part I Section II
28
posted on
05/06/2006 9:04:10 AM PDT
by
MamaTexan
(I will hold my government to the intent of the Founders...whether it likes it or not!)
To: catmanblack.
Smelts hammer Arthur and Christopher!!!
29
posted on
05/07/2006 7:26:09 AM PDT
by
moog
To: SmithL
My goodness! This from the Ninth Circuit? They must be keeping an eye on the Supremes. No judge likes to be overruled. Roberts and Alito have already made a difference.
30
posted on
05/07/2006 7:31:14 AM PDT
by
ContraryMary
(New Jersey -- Superfund cleanup capital of the U.S.A.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-30 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson