ACLU to challenge NC ban on same-sex marriage

WBTV.com ^ | July 9 2013

[GenXteacher]

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the ACLU of North Carolina Legal Foundation (ACLU-NCLF) has announced plans to challenge North Carolina's ban on marriage for same-sex couples.

The civil liberties group says it will amend a federal lawsuit filed against the state last year on behalf of six same-sex couples and their children.

The lawsuit challenges North Carolina's ban on second parent adoptions.

The ACLU is asking North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper to agree to allow an additional claim challenging the state's ban on marriage for same-sex couples to be added to Fisher-Borne v. Smith, a lawsuit filed last year in Greensboro in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina.

[GenXteacher]

Excerpted from WBTV's website. The scum continue their Long March through the courts.

[manc]

prelude to overturn all the states and their laws.

F them, I;m sick of these people pushing their agenda onto others, we have freedom of religion, and states rights and if their way of sex is so open for them then keep it in their own queer community and not bother telling us about it

[max americana]

here we go...the sick bastards are on the march.

[deadrock]

If Oslama can arbitrarily suspend laws, why can't a Governor?

[GenXteacher]

Same here. That, and the crushing underfoot of the people of NC by the Federal judiciary.

[JCBreckenridge]

That took, all of what? 2 weeks?

[Truth2012]

It will be interesting to see how Governor McCrory handles this. He isn’t going to want to upset his base right now because we are really making strides to clean this state up.

[Amendment10]

Bear in mind that activist justices and judges are promoting gay marriage via PC intretations of the equal protections clause of Sec. 1 of the 14th Amendment. But they ignore that the Supreme Court protected state power to discriminate on the basis of sex regardless of 14A's equal protection clause when it decided against Virginia Minor's argument in Minor v. Happersett that her citizenship automatically gave her the right to vote.

So what activist justices, judges and the ACLU are wrongly ignoring is that the states can make laws which discriminate against people on various criteria as long as a given criterion is not an express, constitutionally protected right, and as long as such laws discriminate equally against everybody for which a given criterion applies.

[ZULU]

The ACLU needs yo be surpessed and its members exiles from the US for life or imprisoned for life. They are dedicated to the destruction of civilization.

[GenXteacher]

Barely. Almost as if they had it planned...

[JCBreckenridge]

Pretty sure I spent time arguing with Liberaltarians that we would see this happen.

[GenXteacher]

Yep, but the whatever-floats-your-boat crowd doesn’t care about right and wrong.

[RIghtwardHo]

I’m not so much worried, yet, about a SCOTUS claiming an outright ban is unconstitutional. What does worry the Hell out of me is Full, Faith and Credit. THAT will lead to what none of us want.

[GenXteacher]

The California decision proves they have it in them to defy a vote by the people. They will probably go after Full Faith and Credit next.

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda and Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

Here it comes. Sooner or later some states, state AGs, Congresscritters (yeah I know), state legislatures - are going to have to stand up against the tsunami of evil and just Say No. Somehow or other. Whatever it takes.

Anyone wanting on/off any of my ping lists, freepmail me.

Something just occurred to me. Perhaps one way out of this is for a state that has actual decent state government to Just Say No and when the feds/courts tell them "Too bad, you lose, homos win", the State says "Make me". And then the fedgove/courts say "Well, we'll with hold Uncle's money from you" and then the State could say "Go ahead, make my day". All Uncle's money to the states comes with strings - ropes - whoever pays the piper calls the tune. The state could stop sending Uncle his "share" of the money. State rebellion seems to be the logical step. Someone tell me if my idea is all wet.

[little jeremiah]

Libertarians pretend they are for “freedom” but they actually hate states’ rights. They want the Huge Nanny State Gov to force vice on everyone.

[manc]

same here, I;ve said this would happen, but the usual ignorant libertarians just say don’t be silly while the left fringe say that it’s stupid and that they want to be private.

I’m sick of them telling us all how they have their sex, shut the hell up, get in the bedroom and stop with this insanity of flag waving, freak parades and telling every person that you’re a homosexual.

in essence shut the f@@@ up

NC voted, over 30 other states voted and we are sick of this crap of trying to tell us that we should accept your perversions or way of sex life

[Ransomed]

I don’t know if it’s all wet or not, but if that didn’t happen when the legal murder of the unborn was imposed on those states that had laws against it, I doubt that it would happen for ‘gay marriage.’ You never know.

Freegards

[LibLieSlayer]

The gay activists can pass all of the laws in the world... two things that they can never change:

1) Their acts of sex are abhorrent in the eyes of GOD

2) At the end of the day, after all of the propaganda of trying to sell their evil deeds as being wholesome and normal... they are still sticking their penis up an orifice that contains the feces of another man

[scripter]

I don’t know if your idea is all wet but I certainly like it. No federal funds definitely works both ways.