Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gay marriage fight comes to Southern courtroom
Associated Press ^ | Feb 4, 2014 5:16 PM EST | Brock Vergakis

Posted on 02/04/2014 2:18:46 PM PST by Olog-hai

The gay marriage fight arrived in a Southern courtroom Tuesday, as opponents of a Virginia law banning same-sex unions told a federal judge it was just like the Jim Crow-era prohibition against interracial marriage.

Supporters maintained there was no fundamental right to gay marriage and the ban exists as part of the state’s interest in responsible procreation.

“We have marriage laws in society because we have children, not because we have adults,” said attorney David Nimocks, of the religious group Alliance Defending Freedom.

The case is being closely watched because it could give the gay marriage movement its first foothold in the South, and because legal experts think it’s on the fast track to the U.S. Supreme Court. …

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: adf; cuccinelli; gaymarriage; gaystapo; homosexualagenda; lawsuit; mcauliffe; ssm

1 posted on 02/04/2014 2:18:46 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

the ban on interacial marriage was about OFFSPRING (aka children)

it was about eugenics.

there was no “love test”.

Homosexuals are just about recreational mating.

2 posted on 02/04/2014 2:23:26 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! and
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Civil unions between homosexuals were perhaps too restrictive in their definitions. If a similar civil union personal contract were to be allowed between heterosexual couples, then there would be no basis for overt discrimination.

Gender is not race, nor should it ever be confused with the old legal argument against “miscegenation”, the mixed union between persons of different race.

My part of the country, a “mixed marriage” was between a Lutheran and a Catholic.

3 posted on 02/04/2014 2:28:13 PM PST by alloysteel (Obamacare - Death and Taxes now available online. One-stop shopping at its best!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

There is not, and never was, any justification of a ban against interracial marriage. “Race” (whatever that is) does not touch upon the fundamental nature of marriage -— as long as we’re talking about “human race”.

4 posted on 02/04/2014 2:49:18 PM PST by Mrs. Don-o ("The problem ain't what folks don't know. It's what they DO know, that ain't so!" - Will Rogers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai; Perdogg

Virginia Ping!

5 posted on 02/04/2014 4:10:33 PM PST by HokieMom (Pacepa : Can the U.S. afford a president who can't recognize anti-Americanism?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

“The judge said she would rule soon. Wright Allen is a former public defender and assistant U.S. attorney who was appointed to the post by President Barack Obama.

After Herring’s office decided not to defend the law, Wright Allen considered not even hearing verbal arguments because of the “compelling” filing by the attorney general’s office.”

Gee, I wonder how this one is going to turn out.


6 posted on 02/04/2014 5:34:03 PM PST by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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
Topics · Post Article

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