Silhouette
Gold Member
- Jul 15, 2013
- 25,815
- 1,938
- 265
Well if you care about the topic of gay-lifestyle marriage being forced upon your unwilling state...
States should be able to incentivize that best situation for their only concern in marriage: the children in it. Children need and deserve both complimentary genders in the home for their own self-esteem and balanced formative years that prepare them for society at large. That can be found in the best scenario of their two blood parents or the next best in adoptive father/mother.
So-called "gay marriage", which is properly gay-lifestyle marriage, promises the state it is petitioning for inclusion in the incentive program that they will deprive the state's #1 concern, children, of one of the complimentary gendered parents or one blood parent 100% of the time.
Long story short, since this is a lifestyle question and not one of "civil rights" (behaviors don't have civil rights), a state's majority has a right to reject that type of "marriage" on behalf of untold numbers of children yet to be born within its borders.
Windsor 2013 Upholds and affirms states' "unquestioned authority" on the choice of whether or not to validate gay-lifestyle marriages (also referred to as "same sex marriage" or "marriage equality"). Until further notice by the US Supreme Court, and the US Supreme Court only, Windsor is the standing and highest law concerning the matter. No lower court may overrule a current SCOTUS finding on a specific question of law, nor may they engage in the practice of reading crystal balls to anticipate what future decisions "might be" in order to justify acting as the Supreme Court in-advance to try to overturn Windsor from underneath.
Useful & relevant links:
6th Circuit Federal Appeals Court Gives Thumb s Up to States Choice on Gay Marriage Page 12 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Gay Marriages in States Forced by Circuit Courts to Allow Them Are Not Legal US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings Page 585 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum (82% of the largest poll at USMB say an emphatic "NO")
United States v. Windsor
The start of same-sex marriage in Florida may not happen on Jan. 6 as anticipated.
And even if it does, a battle is brewing over issuing such marriage licenses. While county clerks have been advised they will be committing a misdemeanor by issuing such licenses, some state attorneys — such as Palm Beach County's Dave Aronberg — say they will look the other way....on Tuesday night, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas agreed to consider extending the temporary hold. Once attorneys make their cases on Thursday, Thomas can either unilaterally continue the hold, allow it to be lifted on Jan. 5, or else bring the matter to his colleagues on the Supreme Court....As of now, Florida's county clerks are in a holding pattern after their attorneys said they'd be committing a misdemeanor if they issued marriage licenses Supreme Court to weigh in on Florida same-sex marriage - Sun Sentinel
States should be able to incentivize that best situation for their only concern in marriage: the children in it. Children need and deserve both complimentary genders in the home for their own self-esteem and balanced formative years that prepare them for society at large. That can be found in the best scenario of their two blood parents or the next best in adoptive father/mother.
So-called "gay marriage", which is properly gay-lifestyle marriage, promises the state it is petitioning for inclusion in the incentive program that they will deprive the state's #1 concern, children, of one of the complimentary gendered parents or one blood parent 100% of the time.
Long story short, since this is a lifestyle question and not one of "civil rights" (behaviors don't have civil rights), a state's majority has a right to reject that type of "marriage" on behalf of untold numbers of children yet to be born within its borders.
Windsor 2013 Upholds and affirms states' "unquestioned authority" on the choice of whether or not to validate gay-lifestyle marriages (also referred to as "same sex marriage" or "marriage equality"). Until further notice by the US Supreme Court, and the US Supreme Court only, Windsor is the standing and highest law concerning the matter. No lower court may overrule a current SCOTUS finding on a specific question of law, nor may they engage in the practice of reading crystal balls to anticipate what future decisions "might be" in order to justify acting as the Supreme Court in-advance to try to overturn Windsor from underneath.
Useful & relevant links:
6th Circuit Federal Appeals Court Gives Thumb s Up to States Choice on Gay Marriage Page 12 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Gay Marriages in States Forced by Circuit Courts to Allow Them Are Not Legal US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings Page 585 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum (82% of the largest poll at USMB say an emphatic "NO")
United States v. Windsor
Last edited: