Posted on 02/15/2014 10:11:48 AM PST by yongin
Opponents of same-sex marriage are scrambling to find effective responses, in Congress and state legislatures, to a rash of court rulings that would force some of America's most conservative states to accept gay nuptials.
Some gay-marriage foes are backing a bill recently introduced in both chambers of Congress that would leave states fully in charge of their marriage policies, though the measure stands little chance of passage. In the states, they are endorsing a multitude of bills — some intended to protect gay-marriage bans, others to assert a right, based on religious freedom, to have nothing to do with gay marriages should those bans be struck down.
In Utah, Oklahoma, Kentucky and Virginia, federal judges have voided part or all of the bans on same-sex marriage that voters approved between 2004 and 2006. Each of the rulings has been stayed pending appeals, and a final nationwide resolution may be a few years away in the U.S. Supreme Court.
The trend is unsettling to the activists who oppose gay marriage, and some have called for extraordinary measures in response.
Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, known for fighting to display the Ten Commandments in a judicial building, has written to all 50 governors urging them to support a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage as between only a man and a woman.
In Missouri, where voters approved a gay-marriage ban in 2004, eight Republican House members filed articles of impeachment against Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon after he ordered his administration to accept joint tax returns from same-sex couples who were legally married in other states. The Republican House leader has yet to schedule the matter for public hearings, but some GOP sponsors insist they are serious.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Those idiot RINOs in Kansas folded on the religious liberty bill. Senate President of KS said, “She’s for traditional marriage, but against discrimination.” So much for Sam Brownback’s leadership.
Just have the local Sheriff(s) choose not to enforce it. That’s what 0bama does.
Fight back or lose.
Moral relativism infancy.
To come: Legal polygamy, Polyamoury, Pedophilia, Objectism, Bestiality.
If they argue 2 men can get married then according to relativism there`s no reason why any other type of “ marriage “ can be disallowed
There is no discrimination! Any man is entitled to marry any woman who will have him, and vice versa. Anything else changes the definition of marriage.
Translation: Those who respect Judeo-Christian ethics and the rule of law oppose the forced celebration of sodomy.
Any fight other than a constitutional amendment are a waste of time. Windsor made DOMAs, state or federal, entirely legally indefensible. The cleverness of the crossover voters for Windsor and against standing on Perry was that unlike Roe v Wade’s all at once Supreme Court dictat, this will diffuse decisions across dozens of local courts. There’s a fair chance the Supreme Court will never have to rule because decisions will all be against DOMAs at US Courts of Appeals and they can just refuse the losers’ cert petitions every time. Probably the only way to force it to SCOTUS is to manage a decision to an elected State Supreme Court which may feel it has no choice but to ignore Windsor and its progeny.
Hmmm what I’m saying is that courts and laws are not relevant if the executive chooses to selectively enforce.
That’s the MO the left is using while we still play by the rules. We’re losing that game.
Fight back or lose.
The Early Christians stood up the Roman Empire. Many Orthodox and Catholic believers were willing to risk their lives for the faith under Communism. If American Christians will not fight for religious liberty, just to be popular (looking at you Joe Osteen & Rick Warren), then what is the point of the Gospel?
Gay-BCDiseny News reporting...
Personally, I’m more interested in promoting religious liberty laws that protect people from the gay gestapo. Back in the 1970s, when Roe V Wade came about, liberals were willing to offer conscience clauses for health care workers as an olive branch. Now liberals are against conscience clauses. They want everyone to celebrate gay marriage and abortion. Dissent not allowed. We are made to care as Erick Erickson of Redstate phrased it.
****Bills in Ohio, Mississippi, Arizona, Idaho and Oklahoma would allow a person or company to assert a religious freedom defense against a lawsuit from another private party. For example, a baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple could defend his decision as a legally protected religious right.****
About time. We need to make the case for promoting religious liberty and ending government over reach. Talk about Obama’s silent war on religious practice. (i.e. ObamaCare vs the Little Sisters).
Trouble is, laws like that cannot stop the ceaseless promotion of the New Sexual Immorality by government agencies, including public schools. And besides, when laws to protect cake bakers and wedding planners collide with soon-to-be-mandatory hate-crime policies, the courts will throw the Christians to the lions.
Disgusting. We need to pressure ALL states with Republican legislatures to pass religious freedom bills
I’ve been advocating that we find things we can win, but I don’t see how SCOTUS allows any of these laws to stand.
I worry that the real effect will be officially cementing gay people as a protected class. Exactly the opposite of the intent.
Just as gays wouldn’t have nearly as many victories right now if Texas hadn’t tried to make gay sex between consenting adults legal. That was a step too far, and we’re still suffering under the legal backlash.
There is NOTHING that Obama or the Federal Government can say or do to FORCE me to accept perverts. Not even at the point of a gun. They can KMA............
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.