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

Skip to comments.

Arkansas Becomes First Bible Belt State to Allow Same-Sex Marriage After Judge Lifts Ban
Christian Post ^ | 05/10/2014 | Anugrah Kumar

Posted on 05/11/2014 7:54:39 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

More than a dozen same-sex marriage licenses were issued for the first time in a Bible Belt state Saturday after a state judge declared Arkansas' voter-approved ban on gay wedding to be unconstitutional.

About 50 couples had lined up at the courthouse in Eureka Springs in Carroll County, Arkansas, Saturday morning seeking licenses, according to Reuters.

But Carroll County Deputy Clerk Jane Osborn told The Associated Press that 15 licenses were issued Saturday.

On Friday, Pulaski County Circuit Judge Chris Piazza struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage, saying it violated equal protection provisions of the U.S. Constitution.

"This is an unconstitutional attempt to narrow the definition of equality," Piazza wrote in his decision. "The exclusion of a minority for no rational reason is a dangerous precedent."

The judge refused to put his ruling on hold, allowing same-sex couples to obtain marriage licenses.

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


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Arkansas
KEYWORDS: arkansas; biblebelt; gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; samesexmarriage; ssm

1 posted on 05/11/2014 7:54:39 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I think they mean “after single federal judge overrules the votes of the people, for the oligarchy trumps the democracy.”


2 posted on 05/11/2014 7:56:16 AM PDT by cotton1706 (ThisRepublic.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Well I hate to tell you judge but brothers and sisters have been marrying in your state long before there ever was same sex marriage and you are a fitting example of what it produces...


3 posted on 05/11/2014 8:06:29 AM PDT by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

“Arkanasas” didn’t lift the ban.

ONE judge dictated HIS politically corrupt demand.


4 posted on 05/11/2014 8:08:09 AM PDT by Robert A. Cook, PE (I can only donate monthly, but socialists' ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

Looking at pics of that judge, my gaydar pegs off the scale.

Just sayin’.

The judge that overturned the CA legislation was gay as an Easter parade.


5 posted on 05/11/2014 8:09:09 AM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Arkansas didn’t “allow” it, some goofyass, activist “judge” did.


6 posted on 05/11/2014 8:11:35 AM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Obama's smidgens are coming home to roost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

after single federal judge

It was a state circuit court judge. Hopefully he gets recalled. He also did not issue a stay pending an appeal which is tantamount to single judge rule.


7 posted on 05/11/2014 8:12:17 AM PDT by Mouton (The insurrection laws perpetuate what we have for a government now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It’s always a judge making the gay laws now, isn’t it?


8 posted on 05/11/2014 8:13:39 AM PDT by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

How many times in this country have the will of the people via referendum been overturned bu ONE person sitting on the bench?

I recall just a few months ago a similar thing happening in Utah and in California before that...

It also happened in Oklahoma in regards to the issue of Sharia Law.


9 posted on 05/11/2014 8:15:23 AM PDT by SeekAndFind (If at first you don't succeed, put it out for beta test.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: PGR88

How many times in this country have the will of the people via referendum been overturned bu ONE person sitting on the bench?

I recall just a few months ago a similar thing happening in Utah and in California before that...

It also happened in Oklahoma in regards to the issue of Sharia Law.


10 posted on 05/11/2014 8:15:46 AM PDT by SeekAndFind (If at first you don't succeed, put it out for beta test.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PGR88

He and his ilk need to be “removed” from the bench.


11 posted on 05/11/2014 8:16:58 AM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate "Republicans Freed the Slaves" Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
About 50 couples had lined up at the courthouse in Eureka Springs in Carroll County, Arkansas, Saturday morning seeking licenses, according to Reuters.

Would that be considered a "baited field?"

12 posted on 05/11/2014 8:21:25 AM PDT by Cowboy Bob (They are called "Liberals" because the word "parasite" was already taken.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

The judge did it like the one in Michigan did late on a Friday afternoon to deliberately delay the appeals process so the marriage licenses could be issued in the meantime.

A federal judge in Utah dropped a ruling down right before the Christmas season to achieve similar ends.

There is a pattern to these judicial rulings that smacks of some sort of dare I say it “conspiracy”.

This is a job for investigative journalism if there is any real investigative journalism left out there that isn’t politicized.


13 posted on 05/11/2014 8:22:54 AM PDT by Nextrush (AFFORDABLE CARE ACT=HEALTHCARE INDUSTRY BAILOUT ACT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Its a pretty sad state of affairs in this country when some activist judge can overrule the will of the people. What a joke.


14 posted on 05/11/2014 8:30:04 AM PDT by VOR78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Most frightening aspect of this (and other cases) is how much power judges have and they can make laws. I recall on FR many years ago mention of a judge in Arizona who made decisions regarding school budgets. Is there any area of our lives that the judges cannot touch?


15 posted on 05/11/2014 8:36:55 AM PDT by Jane Austen (Boycott the Philadelphia Eagles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE
.



Tea Party Christians and "Render Unto Caesar" ...

Tea Party Christians and "Render Unto Caesar" - (click)




America's Spiritual Revival and Healing - The Obstacle ...

.America's Spiritual Revival and Healing - The Obstacle ... - (click)




Pro-Life Victory vs. "Render Unto Caesar" ...

Pro-Life Victory vs. "Render Unto Caesar" - (click)




IRS & Church Marriage vs. "Render Unto Caesar" ...

IRS & Church Marriage vs. "Render Unto Caesar" - (click)




Who has the courage to watch this message ... Are today's Christians able to hear and recieve a challenging and difficult, albeit "true", look at why Jesus Christ commanded "Render Unto Caesar" message ?


.

16 posted on 05/11/2014 9:16:59 AM PDT by Patton@Bastogne (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

If there were sanity, the clerk who was issuing these licenses would have been firebombed by an angry mob by now.


17 posted on 05/11/2014 9:29:15 AM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; Jim Robinson

Any “state” judge that goes against a properly voted referedum should be immediately impeached and removed from the bench by the legislature and governor. Any “federal” judge that does so should be ordered arrested by the governor and escorted to the border of the state and told to never return - subject to immediate arrest and permanent detention without trial. The federal ruling should then be ignored.

It is REALLY time to shut down these idiot despots in robes.

Also, any future “landmark” rulings of the SCOTUS - which have the effect of amending the COTUS - should require being upheld by 3/4th of State Legislatures; just like any amendment to the COTUS.

It is fully time to put judges on a lease and limit their powers.


18 posted on 05/11/2014 9:29:56 AM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Because some people in government are now hostile to marriage as God defined it, in order to protect godly marriage we must remove the power of the State to define and regulate marriage. Then anyone will be perfectly free to enter into whatever relationship they want. However, they will not be able to call upon the police power of the state to force me to recognize a “marriage” that I know is theologically illegitimate and morally repugnant.

If we remove government from marriage and return it to the private sphere where it came from, lesbians can still marry each other, but they won’t be able to use government to force me to sell them wedding cake or artfully photograph their “marriage”. They will be free to do as they please without being able to coerce anyone else about their private affair.

But this was never really about marriage. For homosexuals it was social engineering and payback. They could bust marriage as God defined it, they could rub Christianity’s nose in it, they could punish people who objected and they could force anyone who was too vocal to shut up. But what they really want is approval, and it just galls them that a lot of people will never give it to them.


19 posted on 05/11/2014 9:34:32 AM PDT by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
It's not one judge; it's the U.S. Supreme Court in Windsor a year ago.

Gay marriage has been over as a legal issue since then, all that we're seeing now is simply the mop-up. Any lawyer who doesn't recognize this is simply a bad lawyer. Any politician who isn't directing his efforts towards a Constitutional Amendment (or giving up), is wasting his time.

Under Windsor, any law prohibiting gay marriage violates the U.S. Constitution unless its defenders can prove that it was not motivated by a belief that homosexuality is bad or homosexual unions are not as good as traditional marriages. As we've seen in a dozen or more cases since Windsor, carrying this burden is a practical impossibility. Gay marriage advocates should get a clean sweep of the federal Courts of Appeals in the next couple of years, so there's really no reason for the U.S. Supreme Court to get involved again. The only possible exception is if there's a state Supreme Court which defies Windsor but there's no pending case in the state's U.S. Court of Appeals circuit which would nullify it within the next U.S. Supreme Court term -- this would effectively oblige the U.S. Supreme Court to rule.
20 posted on 05/11/2014 9:36:46 AM PDT by only1percent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: only1percent

Absolutely right.

And the written will of the people - no matter how strongly expressed - must never be allowed to override the will of 5 age addled political appointees for as long as America exists - right?

Yessirree, thats what our system is all about.

The people be damned. What matters is the usurpations of the ruling clique.


21 posted on 05/11/2014 9:41:33 AM PDT by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: jsanders2001

That’s funny.

If a man and woman get married in Arkansas and divorced in Mississippi, are they still legally brother and sister?


22 posted on 05/11/2014 9:44:21 AM PDT by VerySadAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; All
... after a state judge declared Arkansas' voter-approved ban on gay wedding to be unconstitutional.

With all due respect to patriots in Arkansas, Arkansas parents are evidently not making sure that their children are being taught the Constitution, particularly the reason for enumerated constitutional rights and 10th Amendment protected state powers. If Arkansas parents were doing their duty to make sure that the children were being taught these things, then more people in Arkansas would know the following concerning the constitutionally indefensible decision by this activist judge.

PC interpretations of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protections Clause by pro-gay activist judges aside, please consider the following. Since the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect so-called gay rights, not only are such "rights" not expressly protected by the Constitution, but the states are free to make laws which discriminate against gay agenda issues, gay marriage in this example, as long as such laws don't unreasonably abridge express constitutional protections.

Regarding how to deal with activist judges, Arkansas voters, and voters in all other states, need to work with their state lawmakers to make judicial watchdog laws which do the following. Such laws should require state judges to promptly, clearly and publicly specify which constitutional clauses they base any case decision on, noting the Constitution's silence about an issue when appropriate, or to face punitive consequences for failing to do so.

23 posted on 05/11/2014 11:29:47 AM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Cuz a judge says so.


24 posted on 05/11/2014 11:39:34 AM PDT by Organic Panic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nextrush
The judge did it like the one in Michigan did late on a Friday afternoon to deliberately delay the appeals process so the marriage licenses could be issued in the meantime.

This is the point where the judge jumps from having a legal/judicial lapse straight into having a massive ethical one.

The proper thing to do would be to issue the ruling, then immediately enjoin it until the appeals process runs its course. By doing what he did the judge brought about a political outcome, not a legal one.
25 posted on 05/11/2014 11:58:56 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Bill "the crooked one" Clinton and Hillary "the carpet munch" Clinton are pleased...I think they both "like to watch"...I think this "judge" does too.

FMCDH(BITS)

26 posted on 05/11/2014 3:21:54 PM PDT by nothingnew (I fear for my Republic due to marxist influence in our government. Open eyes/see)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter

Another thing that led up to this ruling was an announcement by the Attorney General of Arkansas that he would not defend the state’s marriage law.


27 posted on 05/11/2014 11:37:53 PM PDT by Nextrush (AFFORDABLE CARE ACT=HEALTHCARE INDUSTRY BAILOUT ACT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Jane Austen

Good point. IIRC, didn’t judicial ruling also overturn a California immigration proposition as well? It’s very true that the SSM is only the tip of the iceberg, count on it happening with healthcare and immigration as well.


28 posted on 05/15/2014 1:37:55 PM PDT by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Morpheus2009

Resolution opposing homosexual “marriage.” fails in the Arkansas legislature. What is wrong with Arkansas? I hear Pryor has a big lead in the Senate race, too. http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2014/may/16/resolution-gay-marriage-fails-legislature/


29 posted on 05/16/2014 12:25:52 PM PDT by balch3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | 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