Posted on 05/14/2007 9:29:15 AM PDT by Zakeet
HARTFORD, Conn. - The state Supreme Court on Monday took up the issue of gay marriage in Connecticut, the first state in the nation to pass a civil unions law without court intervention.
Eight gay and lesbian couples, unhappy with civil unions, are suing over the state's refusal to grant them marriage licenses. They want the court to rule that the state's marriage law is unconstitutional because it applies only to heterosexual couples and denies gay couples the financial, social and emotional benefits of marriage.
The state argues that Connecticut's 2005 civil unions law gives the couples the equality they seek under state law.
The state Supreme Court began hearing the case Monday and was expected to issue a decision later in the year.
Attorneys on both sides say a ruling in the couples' favor could have nationwide implications for states that have adopted or are considering civil union-like legislation.
Currently, only Massachusetts allows same-sex couples to marry. Connecticut, Vermont, California, New Jersey, Maine and Washington have laws allowing either civil unions or domestic partnerships. Hawaii extends certain spousal rights to same-sex couples and cohabiting heterosexual pairs.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
"Joanne Mock, left, and Beth Kerrigan speak to a reporter in front of the Connecticut State Supreme court in Hartford, Conn., on Monday, May 14, 2007. The two are part of the court case Kerrigan & Mock et al v. Connecticut Department of Public Health, which deals with same-sex marriage and will be argued before the state Supreme Court."
They should ask the LEGISLATURE. That is where laws are MADE.
Gay activists planned all this years ago. The plan was to get same-sex marriage by court order. They consciously decided to work through the courts rather than through legislatures. Only in the past few years have there been efforts to pass homosexual marriage legislation in a few states.
Their eventual goal is to get homosexual marriage legalized in some states, then go to the Federal courts to overturn the Federal Defense of Marriage Act. That is their goal and they are still at it, even though 27 states now have constitutional amendments defining marriage.
You would have to ask the activists why they never wanted to go through the legislatures, but they decided to force it through court instead.
Having equal protection under the law is not good enough for the gays. That is not their agenda. They want to redefine marriage and to further bring the moral fiber of this nation into the bottom of the cesspool. It will not end here. Next will be demands for polymorous marriage, polygamous marriage, human/animal marriage, adult-kid marriage, until there is no moral standard that is objective and stable.
Just Say No to both gay Marriage and “civil unions”. It’s easier that way, and nobody is going to stop with “civil unions” anyway.
And in fact, it’s easier to justify banning civil unions than “Gay Marriage”. Once you say it’s OK to give same-sex couples “all the same benefits” as normal couples, you’ve conceded that there is a compelling state interest in having gay people coupled together.
And how do you justify not giving them the title “marriage” after you’ve done that? It’s like you are treating “Marriage” as a religious thing, and then enforcing religious codes.
There is not compelling state interest in gay couples. They don’t bind society together, they don’t propagate the species, they actually work AGAINST ensuring that children are raised by biological parents who have an inate natural desire to protect and nurture their children.
The tie of biology is strong, and cannot be denied. Look at how adopted kids seem to “know” there is a natural parent out there, and will so often drop everything to find those natural parents — it’s just what we want.
Government has a right to encourage the bonds of biological parenting, and there’s no point in giving any support to any OTHER kind of family.
Rudy is ok with it.
There is not a compelling state interest in gay couples.... Wow, what a revolutionary concept. The State grants benefits to encourage heterosexual couples form long term commitments because there is a compelling state interest in something called a family.
There is not a compelling state interest in gay couples.... Wow, what a revolutionary concept. The State grants benefits to encourage heterosexual couples form long term commitments because there is a compelling state interest in something called a family.
It would take a twisted and Godless state not to see that. But there are a lot of twisted and Godless states out there.
This is a key concept that doesn’t get discussed enough. The reason marriage exists in the first place is because of the compelling state interest in regulating family relationships, to provide for children, etc.
The gay activists claim that they aren’t being treated “equally” but they don’t recognize the lack of compelling state interest in their relationship, which many people think is less than that of opposite sex couples with children. They claim discrimination without addressing why marriage and family law has evolved the way it has.
If Hillary or another liberal Democrat is elected President, you will see gay marriage mandated by the Supreme court when he or she has a chance to appoint some liberal judges there.
Homosexual Agenda Ping
Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.
Click FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search for a list of all related articles.
Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.
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.