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

Skip to comments.

Ruling by Miami-Dade judge allows same-sex marriages to begin in Florida
Miami Herald ^ | 1/5/15 | PATRICIA MAZZEI AND STEVE ROTHAUS

Posted on 01/05/2015 8:15:06 AM PST by SoFloFreeper

Miami-Dade County will become the first place in Florida to allow same-sex couples to marry on Monday, 13 hours before a gay-marriage ban that has been ruled unconstitutional is lifted in the rest of the state.

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


TOPICS: Breaking News; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: againstwillofvoters; florida; floriduh; gomorrah; harveyruvin; homosexualagenda; judicialactivism; judicialtyranny; robertlhinkle; sarahzabel; tragedy; truth
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 last
To: HiTech RedNeck

....which reflects the citations used in post 38.


61 posted on 01/05/2015 11:09:05 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

Nothing guarantees the mortal coil will keep on as it has been.


62 posted on 01/05/2015 11:12:48 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: sten

they spent millions and got out their votes. They lost and now they get judges to overturn what they lost in a constitutional amendment.

Pathetic sore losers who won’t stop their baby tantrums until they get their own way like a spoilt baby.


63 posted on 01/05/2015 11:47:54 AM PST by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

And all the former governor of Florida can say is: “there goes the courts again, what can you do?”. What a statesman.


64 posted on 01/05/2015 12:16:17 PM PST by Baladas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
The fight goes on. The media and these judges are on the wrong side of history. See post 38.

I'm sorry, post 38 tells me nothing practical or ongoing. As far as I can tell, this issue is decided, or is there something outstanding that has yet to be resolved? Once these floodgates are opened, I don't see any way of stepping back.

65 posted on 01/05/2015 12:44:08 PM PST by Paradox (and now here we are....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Paradox

Well, either you get it or you don’t.

If you understand the history behind these statements and of the truths in post 4, you’ll understand why I know the issue IS decided, but not in the way the judges, celebratory media, and faux “happiness” being expressed by the litigants today believe.

bye.


66 posted on 01/05/2015 1:07:02 PM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
True. We only lost four states to voters.

In four states (ME, MD, WA and MN), gay marriage passed by voter referenda. In an additional 8 states, it was passed by the legislature (CT, DE, HI, IL, NH, NY, RI, VT, plus DC). In two more states, it was passed by the legislature after courts struck down earlier bans (CA, MA). Finally, in NJ, gay marriage was passed by the legislature, then vetoed by Governor Christie, then Christie decided not to defend the court challenge. In all the other states, it was by decision of state judges (IA, NJ, NM, CO) or federal court judges (all the rest).

67 posted on 01/05/2015 2:02:10 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sten
i’m trying to understand how a federal judge can overrule a state constitution amendment. 61% voted for the amendment and now a federal judge can dictate what he feels is right how that’s even legal is beyond me.

The US Constitution trumps state constitutions, so it is legal for federal judges to strike down state laws and constitutions which violate the federal constitution. (I do not agree that a ban on gay marriage violates the federal constitution, but that is the legal principle behind these cases.)

This past November, voters in Washington State passed by referendum sweeping new gun control laws. If a federal court were to strike them down under the 2nd Amendment, would you be crying about the will of the voters being thwarted by an unelected judge?

68 posted on 01/05/2015 2:11:14 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: MeshugeMikey

EXACTLY


69 posted on 01/05/2015 2:36:51 PM PST by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: manc

A: 9th/10th.

If the Left had any brains at all, they note they are opening a can of worms here: I’m still trying to find where in the Constitution a license is required for ANYTHING, let alone our Rights.

Where is the reciprocity of States to our Constitutional carry? Why does one need to get approval to WORK, let alone open a business? Why is not one States’ ‘licensed professionals’ allowed to work in another (lawyers, etc.)??

Course, the (R) haven’t brought up the point, nor has the NRA, nor the bar, nor...


70 posted on 01/05/2015 4:16:26 PM PST by i_robot73 (Give me one example and I will show where gov't is the root of the problem(s).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

yes i would.

the states are not meant to be 100% uniform. they are meant to govern themselves allowing the citizens to choose which state is the best to live in.

this goes for taxes as well. the Constitution states taxation was to be levied on the STATES not on the individual. additionally, taxes were to be uniformly applied depending on the population of the state compared to the country. it wasn’t until the ‘elites’ decided to ram through the 16th (unratified) amendment that allowed the fedgov to tax the individual.


71 posted on 01/05/2015 4:22:16 PM PST by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

All 50 are fair game in a few years. If their judge says no, then well, they will change their mind or get replaced.


72 posted on 01/06/2015 11:13:44 AM PST by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

That is the point many people miss, the judges can rule gun control constitutional if they wish, it’s all a question of when they feel that there will be no outcry.


73 posted on 01/06/2015 11:15:19 AM PST by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 last

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