As a resident of the State of New York, I must say I am sick over this ruling. I am also worried about the exact nature of the religious exemptions. But what upsets me is that the voter in NYS had no say in this matter, and from what I read, that is because unlike California, the voter cannot overturn what the legislature deems as legal. Is there no state in the union that refuses to capitulate to this devilry?
As I posted on the “vote in process thread”, our NY GOP just consigned itself to permanent minority status.
In CA a single gay judge can rule a voter-led constitutional amendment to be unconstitutional.
There’s no place where some liberal in some position of power can’t attempt to undo what voters want. If it isn’t the legislature it’s the governor, or the state supreme court. Or it’s a liberal secretary of state (ex WI). Or then they go to whatever federal court is there. We have to be engaged all the way all the time and force them to either do their job or force them out.
I am also worried about the exact nature of the religious exemptions.
. . .
Doesn’t matter what the religious exemptions are.
The homosexual lobby still won’t be happy and they’ll be targeting churches that refuse to perform the marriages.
Because it’s painted as a civil rights issue, I can guarantee you that non-participating churches can look forward to having their tax-exempt status challenged at the very least.
There are plenty of states whose citizens do not capitulate to this evil. Even the citizens of California voted overwhelmingly to protect the Biblical definition of marriage.
The problem is the communist judges who overturn it.
The other states like NY are similarly led by tyrants.
The next step for the homos is to take this to the Federal level and force those states that do not recognize queer marriage to reciprocate, that is, recognize the queer marriages from other states. Their argument will be that it is discriminatory for there not to be “equality” across the states.
And remember, folks, one of the arguments AGAINST queer/homosexual/same-sex marriage is that it is not fair that homosexuals have EXTRA rights.
Heterosexuals abide by the law that we cannot marry someone of our own sex. Homosexuals have those same limitations. AND homosexuals are as free as heterosexuals to marry anyone they want, provided that other person meets the same requirements that heterosexuals are limited to (opposite sex, age requirements, bloodline requirements, not currently married).
But the homosexuals want the EXTRA right of being able to marry someone of the same sex.
Thus, homosexuals want SPECIAL RIGHTS, not EQUAL RIGHTS.
38 states have either voted it down, or amended their constitutions to forbid it.
Ditto