Posted on 09/02/2013 7:29:21 PM PDT by kevcol
Two Lexington County women who were legally married in Washington, D.C., have filed a federal lawsuit in Columbia, challenging the state’s Defense of Marriage Law and a 2006 amendment to the state Constitution that expressly banned same-sex marriages.
The lawsuit, brought by S.C. Highway Patrol trooper Katherine Bradacs and Tracie Goodwin, was filed in U.S. District Court in Columbia last week.
Judge Joe Anderson, a veteran judge who has presided in numerous high-profile civil and criminal cases, has been named to hear arguments in the case, which will be heard without a jury.
Defendants in the case are Gov. Nikki Haley and State Attorney General Alan Wilson, both in their official capacities.
The lawsuit not only takes aim at a state law and a constitutional amendment passed by majorities, but it squarely confronts a long-standing and deep-rooted social, religious and political culture of a majority of South Carolinians who oppose gay rights, even as the idea of such rights gains increasing legitimacy elsewhere.
(Excerpt) Read more at charlotteobserver.com ...
I honestly think this is a wedge issue, that we better start paying attention to, and turn this around.
I went to church this weekend, and the pastor started with homosexuals, transsexuals, and proceeded to list off atheists, and others who we should allow to commune with us as good Christians.
Say WHAT?
Look, I’m not here to say all homosexuals should be kicked out of church, but the Bible is clear, and we need to stick to some core values.
I’m a sinner. I can still attend. I think other sinners should be able to as well, but let’s remember that my infractions are recognized as infractions, and theirs are quickly becoming neutralized in the interest of inclusivity.
That is wrong IMO.
It’s time for some sodomite agenda push back. These Nazis won’t be happy until we give each of them medals for standing up to God.
Betcha they’re unionized pervs and that the union (demorats) is/are paying for their legal escapades. Boils down to taxpayer funding as we invert the right/wrong world we live in.
“I’m a sinner. I can still attend. I think other sinners should be able to as well, but let’s remember that my infractions are recognized as infractions, and theirs are quickly becoming neutralized in the interest of inclusivity.”
That’s the point. If we know we’re sinners in need of forgiveness, there’s still hope. If however, we believe our sin is not a sin, and is something good, then there is no hope.
“I’m a sinner. I can still attend. I think other sinners should be able to as well, but let’s remember that my infractions are recognized as infractions, and theirs are quickly becoming neutralized in the interest of inclusivity.”
That’s the point. If we know we’re sinners in need of forgiveness, there’s still hope. If however, we believe our sin is not a sin, and is something good, then there is no hope.
“I honestly think this is a wedge issue, that we better start paying attention to, and turn this around.”
Yeah, but here’s the thing: how?
We’ve already lost the majority in this country, and the numbers are continuing to move ever-more-quickly in the wrong direction.
You’re not going to convince SCOTUS to strip already-married couples of their status.
The best I think we can hope for is a ruling that lets individual state bans remain. What do you realistically see happening?
I agree 100%. And yes they should be able to attend and should attend. But they should no more have their sins condoned than adulterers or any other sinners. You would never ever see or expect to see and adulterer admitting it and expecting the any church to sanction it!!!
I would add, before it’s too late Churches across the land must proclaim that they perform, preside over, and bless ONLY Holy Matrimony! NO civil marriage. If couples want to get a license, they are free to, but that none is necessary for Holy Matrimony. Let the govt stuff their marriage equality demands. Homosexuals do not and cannot qualify, ever, for Holy Matrimony!
This lawsuit should be laughed at and tossed out of court in seconds. If the plaintiffs are citing DOMA that SCOTUS struck down, it doesn’t apply to SC’s law.
South Carolinians on Facebook are dead set against this!!
And IMO, it muddles the whole thing. Do we believe in God’s plan or don’t we? Are we going to slip over the abyss, in the interest of inclusion? If we aren’t going to follow God’s word, then we’re adrift.
Honestly, I don’t know. If this stands, it seems to me polygamy is next, then bestiality. Transgender was grandfathered in under homosexuality.
Somewhere along the line sex with under-age kids comes in. They’re already working feverishly to achieve that.
I honestly think some homosexuals are going to be shocked at what they find they ushered in by demanding to be recognized on the same footing with heterosexuals.
This isn’t what many of them envisioned.
I agree with you, but you’re going to see large amounts of religious persecution in reaction.
Here in this nation, we are on the verge of a new attack on Christians more or less like the Romans did. We’re probably about 35 AD right now, but swiftly we will see the 70 AD version of Christian treatment at the hands of the Romans.
End timers are going see a lot of very daunting things around the corner.
Also, since gay rights are not expressly protected by the Constitution, justices cannot reasonably apply so-called gay rights to the states via the 14th Amendment. But that's ultimately not going to stop activist justices from thinking of some flake excuse to protect constitutionally unprotected gay marriage if they think that they can get away with doing so.
Also, consider that anti-Christian factions have promoted gay marriage by politicking that the Full Faith and Credit Clause, Section 2 of Article IV, means that traditional marriage states must acknowledge the constitutionally undefined gay marriage rights of people married in states where such marriage is legal. But note that not only did the Founding States leave it up to Congress to decide the extent to which official records in one state must be respected in another, but consider the following.
After pro-gay media dust settled on the Supreme Court's decision about DOMA, according to Wikipedia, Section 2 of DOMA, which respects 10th Amendment protected state powers, remained intact. Corrections welcome.
Section 2. Powers reserved to the statesNo State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.
So given what I understand about this issue at this point in time, the people in question evidently don't know the Constitution that they swore to defend and are consequently listening to whomever tells them what they want to hear.
Insights welcome.
How long did they judge shop to find a regressive reprobate judge in SC?
Nothing unexpected here as the pastor had already been working behind the scenes already with various gay groups and even recruited gays within his congregation to "teach" Sunday School classes to members of their group, unbeknownst to his non-gay members!
Um, you need a new church... quick!
You’re under the false impression that the Constitution matters in such matters.
The only reason that section of DOMA stands is because Anthony Kennedy didn’t feel the time was right to go all the way. But he has made his position clear. It’s just a matter of time before he gets the chance to strike down the rest of DOMA, and all state laws and amendments that ban gay marriage.
Seeing it about to happen, I predict John Roberts will go along with him to make it a 6-3 decision.
I’ve attended three churches this year, trying to find one that worked for me. Looks like I’m off to number four.
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.