Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NM high court to hear gay marriage case next month
The Albuquerque Journal ^ | September 6, 2013 | AP

Posted on 09/07/2013 8:38:20 AM PDT by CedarDave

SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — New Mexico’s highest court signaled Friday it may quickly resolve whether gay marriage is legal in the state.

The five-member state Supreme Court issued an order setting an Oct. 23 hearing in a case that finally could decide whether marriage licenses can be issued to gay and lesbian couples.

(Excerpt) Read more at abqjournal.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; US: New Mexico
KEYWORDS: gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; marriage
NM county clerks, often at the direction of district court judges, some on their own volition, and all at the urging of homosexual activists, liberals and Democrats began issuing licenses in August to gay couples. They are taking advantage of state law which does not explicitly say marriage is between a man and a woman (though marriage forms show places for names to be entered by gender), and the state constitution which forbids all forms of discrimination. There is little likelihood that the state Supreme Court will declare the practice illegal as all are partisan Democrats and ruled two weeks ago that it is discrimination for a Christian photographer to refuse to photograph gay weddings or commitment ceremonies.
1 posted on 09/07/2013 8:38:20 AM PDT by CedarDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CedarDave

And another State up in flames.


2 posted on 09/07/2013 8:40:05 AM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CedarDave

And, these liberal judges will probably also cite the recent Supreme Court decision on homosexual marriage.

If New Mexico law really doesn’t explicitly say that marriage is a man and a woman, then these liberal judges will rule for homosexual marriage.

In some state lawsuits on marriage, even liberal judges were reluctant to overturn laws which specifically defined marriage. But if New Mexico’s law has this loophole, then it’s a done deal that homosexual marriage will be happening legally in New Mexico very soon.


3 posted on 09/07/2013 8:43:07 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

Well of course. I don’t think some get it. SCOTUS legalized gay marriage. It is only a matter of time. You can’t put this one back in the bottle. Full Faith and Credit is next. And when my generation passes away, what is coming up is VERY Liberal and VERY pro homosexual marriage.

Thank your “conservative” SCOTUS.


4 posted on 09/07/2013 8:50:53 AM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

New Mexico state law does not expressly permit or prohibit gay unions and the state constitution prohibits gender discrimination. Those two items are what the activists are using to push their agenda. The Republican governor Susana Martinez believes state voters should decide the issue with a constitutional amendment declaring marriage is between a man and a woman. However, there is little chance of it getting through the Democrat-controlled legislature first (NM does not have a referendum process, constitutional amendments have to be approved by the legislature to be put on the general election ballot).


5 posted on 09/07/2013 9:00:40 AM PDT by CedarDave (Benghazi victim's mom: "Hillary doesn't give a damn about you.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CedarDave; All
New Mexico state law does not expressly permit or prohibit gay unions and the state constitution prohibits gender discrimination.

As posted in related threads, the states have amended the Constitution to expressly protect religious expression, but not to protect so-called gay rights. So the recent decision by pro-gay activist New Mexico judges to find a Christian photographer, I believe, guilty of violating that state's constitutonal provision against gender discrimination is in violation of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment imo. Section 1 prohibits the states from making laws which abridge constitutionally enumerated protections.

6 posted on 09/07/2013 10:39:49 AM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CedarDave

We already know how that ultra-radical court will “rule.”


7 posted on 09/07/2013 1:20:44 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (Resist We Much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CedarDave

The only obvious path forward is a federal marriage amendment, but mum’s the word on that solution, alarmingly. The libs(bertarians) kept telling us that an amendment wasn’t necessary unless this unconscionable event occurred. Now that it has, they are strangely mute.


8 posted on 09/07/2013 2:44:30 PM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

We could maybe have passed an amendment fifteen years ago, but it could never get through the states today. There has to be a different solution we can pursue.

Then again, if NM had banned it back then, we wouldn’t have this situation today. Instead, they put gays on the protected list a decade ago, which ought to tell us what the people of NM really think about this.


9 posted on 09/08/2013 5:10:52 AM PDT by highball ("I never should have switched from scotch to martinis." -- the last words of Humphrey Bogart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson