Posted on 08/04/2010 1:45:48 PM PDT by tsmith130
Court enjoins enforcement of Prop 8... Will be released at 2 pm pt...
Judge strikes down 'Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California'..
His view of the law is decidedly "gay." He had already ruled against parents who - on religious grounds - objected to a school's gay indoctrination of their children. And also ruled for a city that - to prevent "workplace discrimination" - took action against employees for fliers promoting heterosexual marriage and values.
Too bad if this ever passed some scum bag judge would strike it down.
But really, is anyone surprised that a GAY judges would strike down Prop 8? The 9th Jerkit Court will agree with the GAY judge then it moves on to the Supreme Court where Prop 8 will be upheld.
Not that I'm advocating such an action, but this can turn out to be a two edged sword. They get to destroy marriage; somebody else gets to destroy them ~ AND probably get away with it.
Backlash in matters related to sex and family is always rigorous.
The Saudi government continues to execute and maim homosexual activists of course.
The United States needs to break into two. Let the commies and progressive have California and a couple of other states. Nothing will change their backward thinking.
No. The decision has to be upheld by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, in order for it to have effect on the entire 9th Circuit. This decision only applies directly to California.
Separately, howappealing.law.com has a link to the opinion.
And one of the lawyers for the plaintiffs was Ted Olson. Go figure....
I can guarantee you that some NAMBLA freak is seeking out a psycho lawyer to propose that man boy love should be legal.
Ruth Bater Ginsberg believes that the age of consent should be lowered to 12. These F$^#$^ are out of control!
That's incorrect. This decision affects only Prop 8 in California. Part of the judge's reasoning is that California previously granted gay marriage. He says that the state cannot then take away a right it has previously granted. I don't believe Washington has granted the right to gay marriage.
I agree. On the right side there is a movie studio in NC.
It sounds nuts but the right vs left will never go away.
Oh... and they get Obama and all of the debt THEY HAVE CREATED.
We will have jobs, oil drilling,guns and no teleprompters!!!
Everytime a single judge does so, more people are awakened and the day of reckoning for Sodom draws closer.
So keep voting and don't get discouraged.
Here is the opinion:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35374462/Prop-8-Ruling-FINAL
It is utterly laughable. The overwhelming majority of the opinion consists of Walker trying to cram as many pieces of homosexual propaganda into the factual record as possible. It’s clear he is simply trying to make the road easier for the deviants when this goes up on appeal.
As for the conclusions of law, he ignored binding precedent. Flat out ignored it. He didn’t even make an attempt to address it. (Baker v. Nelson).
He actually tried to assert that the right to same-sex ‘marriage’ satisfied the Glucksberg standard (which requires a showing that the purported right is “deeply rooted in the conscience and traditions of the American people.”) He did this by redefining the right, and claiming that traditional marriage was born in an era of “racial and gender inequality.” (IOW: He called traditional marriage bigoted.)
The opinion is literally the worst piece of trash that I have ever seen. This makes Roe looked like a reasoned masterpiece.
A number of witnesses for the anti-SSM side declined to testify, and made the decision out of fear for physically violent reprisals against themselves and/or their families.
Proponents informed the court on the first day of trial, January 11, 2010, that they were withdrawing Loren Marks, Paul Nathanson, Daniel N Robinson and Katherine Young as witnesses. Doc #398 at 3. Proponents' counsel stated in court on Friday, January 15, 2010, that their witnesses because they "were extremely concerned about their personal safety, and did not want to appear with any recording of any sort, whatsoever."
Shave off his goatee and he looks exactly like Anderson Cooper.
I really wish Jon Voight would propose this and they can all use Pelosi’s plane to go WEST to CA.
He has some specious reasoning for taking this case, but it doesn't cover up the fact he is well paid. Now Bois is a problem to be dealt with ~ he may be gay, he may not be, but he has a consistent track record concerning sex and children ~ he wants nothing to interfere with it.
I'd be asking Olson about that aspect in fact ~ is he a pedophile?
How can the federal government tell the states how it can or cannot amend its constitution in regards to queer marriage?
Utter and complete non-sense. Gay Marriage was already forbidden in the state constitution when it was struck down by the California supreme court. Prop 8 again made marriage between a man and a woman. NO LAW WAS EVER PASSED MAKING GAY MARRIAGE LEGAL. GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT!
I don't know about that. Judge Napolitano, who is usually pretty accurate, thinks Kennedy would vote with the liberals on this one. Kennedy previously voted with them to invalidate a Colorado law that interfered with gay rights.
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.