Posted on 04/25/2024 2:23:55 PM PDT by fwdude
A court case that already has been in the system for years is being pushed up to the level of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and it is expected ultimately to be before the Supreme Court, where it could be a vehicle to overturn that institution's creation of same-sex marriage for the nation.
That 2015 ruling, the Obergefell case, has been described by no less than the chief justice of the high court as unrelated to the U.S. Constitution, and exploded limits on same-sex marriage in dozens of states.
...
The case at hand is the attack on former Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis. She was in office at the time the Obergefell decision exploded on the American public, and was caught in a dilemma: Her faith would not allow her to issue certificates to same-sex duos, nor did her state law at the time allow it. Yet the court ruling demanded it.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Ah, the famous Intra-state transfer of illegal goods or activities.... Good put those corporations out of business for pushing across state borders their illegal activities from adjacent or nearby states.
p
Yup. God created marriage because we, created in His image, are not animals. Only an arrogant, corrupt, reprobate mind would attempt to redefine God’s plan.
“Marriage licenses go way back and there are situations such as the military where being legally recognized as married matters.”
As far as the government is concerned it’s a tax issue. The Gov’t wants a cut of the action.
“The Gov’t wants a cut of the action.”
If .gov legalized marriage to cats and dogs they could rake in the cash...
“God created marriage because we, created in His image, are not animals. Only an arrogant, corrupt, reprobate mind would attempt to redefine God’s plan.”
Governments who collect taxes over the holy matrimony are exactly that - arrogant corrupt and of reprobate-mindedness and they are redefining God’s plan by taxing this god-given blessing.
“As far as the government is concerned it’s a tax issue. The Gov’t wants a cut of the action.”
“”””””As far as the government is concerned it’s a tax issue. The Gov’t wants a cut of the action.””””””
It is much more than that, a marriage has to be known as legal, for instance for military pensions and survivor pensions.
“It is much more than that, a marriage has to be known as legal, for instance for military pensions and survivor pensions.”
Your assumptions are not correct.
Military pensions are a percentage of base pay for time served over 20 years. Not allowances (dependants are an allowance calculation).
Survivor benefits are paid into by the retiree. If the retiree and the spouse decide not to pay into it... it doesn’t exist. It’s something like term life insurance.
Medical insurance is also paid into.
No such thing as “gay” or “gay marriage”.
I’m not talking about whatever the new policy is, I meant in our history and the military was just an example, people have had to know if a person was married to the other person for a lot of reasons.
Licenses long predate America, Washington and Jefferson paid for licenses, Revolutionary widows had to prove their marriage to a dead soldier.
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.