Judge Roy Moore defies feds: 'Law is very clear'

I'm surprised this isn't blowing up all over the web. It's such a hot topic, whether you agree or disagree. In Alabama, a same-sex marriage fight is upon us. Last month, a federal judge struck down the state's law against the unions. But Sunday night, "in a dramatic show of defiance toward the federal judiciary, Chief JusticeRoy S. Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court ordered the state’s probate judges not to issue marriage licenses to gay couples on Monday, the day same-sex marriages were expected to begin."

The Phantom Diaries Alabama Objects to Gay Marriage
I don't think it's being discussed much because not a single person in the world is surprised that Alabama, the butthole of America, is on the wrong side of history yet again.

And when blacks and Hispanics voted no to gay marriage in California? I mean come on I could see that happening in Alabama but how do you explain that in California the liberal freak show state in the union.
Ignorance isn't exclusive to the deep south. It's just more prevalent.

Ahem the number of people who voted to ban gay marriage in California is greater than the entire population of Alabama. Further, in California 70% of blacks and 54% of Hispanics voted to ban gay marriage. So if the left or gay community has some issue with Alabama on gay marriage I think they need to speak to their own Democratic party base down there. KABOOM!!
It's stupid to put civil rights up for a popular vote, the people who organized such unconstitutional initiatives had to know they were eventually doomed.
Marriage isn't a civil right.
 
I don't need to dispute anything. Marriage is the joining of two people.
That isn't in the Constitution. States have always defined who could get married. There's no reason three or more couldn't marry if we are going to let marriage be defined as people want. Gay marriage activists are hypocritical to reject traditional marriage while staking their claim to the aspects of traditional marriage they want.

Change the Constitution to include sexual orientations of individuals to be protected like race, religion or gender and you'll at least have an honest argument.

States have always had the right to define marriage- subject to constitutional guarantees.

The Supreme Court has overturned State marriage laws at least 3 times- all based upon equal treatment claims.
On sexual preferences? I call bull.

Call whatever you want.

You are obsessed about sexual preferences- the Supreme Court was focusing on equal treatment before the law, and that marriage is an individual right that can only be denied when the State can demonstrate a specific State interest that is accomplished by denying that right.
States have an interest in maintaining the nuclear family.
 
I don't think it's being discussed much because not a single person in the world is surprised that Alabama, the butthole of America, is on the wrong side of history yet again.

And when blacks and Hispanics voted no to gay marriage in California? I mean come on I could see that happening in Alabama but how do you explain that in California the liberal freak show state in the union.
Ignorance isn't exclusive to the deep south. It's just more prevalent.

Ahem the number of people who voted to ban gay marriage in California is greater than the entire population of Alabama. Further, in California 70% of blacks and 54% of Hispanics voted to ban gay marriage. So if the left or gay community has some issue with Alabama on gay marriage I think they need to speak to their own Democratic party base down there. KABOOM!!
It's stupid to put civil rights up for a popular vote, the people who organized such unconstitutional initiatives had to know they were eventually doomed.
Marriage isn't a civil right.
The supreme court has ruled otherwise. So yes it is.
 
I don't need to dispute anything. Marriage is the joining of two people.
That isn't in the Constitution. States have always defined who could get married. There's no reason three or more couldn't marry if we are going to let marriage be defined as people want. Gay marriage activists are hypocritical to reject traditional marriage while staking their claim to the aspects of traditional marriage they want.

Change the Constitution to include sexual orientations of individuals to be protected like race, religion or gender and you'll at least have an honest argument.

States have always had the right to define marriage- subject to constitutional guarantees.

The Supreme Court has overturned State marriage laws at least 3 times- all based upon equal treatment claims.
On sexual preferences? I call bull.

Call whatever you want.

You are obsessed about sexual preferences- the Supreme Court was focusing on equal treatment before the law, and that marriage is an individual right that can only be denied when the State can demonstrate a specific State interest that is accomplished by denying that right.
States have an interest in maintaining the nuclear family.
What interest is that?
 
And when blacks and Hispanics voted no to gay marriage in California? I mean come on I could see that happening in Alabama but how do you explain that in California the liberal freak show state in the union.
Ignorance isn't exclusive to the deep south. It's just more prevalent.

Ahem the number of people who voted to ban gay marriage in California is greater than the entire population of Alabama. Further, in California 70% of blacks and 54% of Hispanics voted to ban gay marriage. So if the left or gay community has some issue with Alabama on gay marriage I think they need to speak to their own Democratic party base down there. KABOOM!!
It's stupid to put civil rights up for a popular vote, the people who organized such unconstitutional initiatives had to know they were eventually doomed.
Marriage isn't a civil right.
The supreme court has ruled otherwise. So yes it is.
The people ruled otherwise. The people should trump the supreme court.
 
That isn't in the Constitution. States have always defined who could get married. There's no reason three or more couldn't marry if we are going to let marriage be defined as people want. Gay marriage activists are hypocritical to reject traditional marriage while staking their claim to the aspects of traditional marriage they want.

Change the Constitution to include sexual orientations of individuals to be protected like race, religion or gender and you'll at least have an honest argument.

States have always had the right to define marriage- subject to constitutional guarantees.

The Supreme Court has overturned State marriage laws at least 3 times- all based upon equal treatment claims.
On sexual preferences? I call bull.

Call whatever you want.

You are obsessed about sexual preferences- the Supreme Court was focusing on equal treatment before the law, and that marriage is an individual right that can only be denied when the State can demonstrate a specific State interest that is accomplished by denying that right.
States have an interest in maintaining the nuclear family.
What interest is that?
perpetuating the tax paying species.
 
Ignorance isn't exclusive to the deep south. It's just more prevalent.

Ahem the number of people who voted to ban gay marriage in California is greater than the entire population of Alabama. Further, in California 70% of blacks and 54% of Hispanics voted to ban gay marriage. So if the left or gay community has some issue with Alabama on gay marriage I think they need to speak to their own Democratic party base down there. KABOOM!!
It's stupid to put civil rights up for a popular vote, the people who organized such unconstitutional initiatives had to know they were eventually doomed.
Marriage isn't a civil right.
The supreme court has ruled otherwise. So yes it is.
The people ruled otherwise. The people should trump the supreme court.
Said not a single person involved in writing the constitution. Go find a pole to smoke moron.
 
Ignorance isn't exclusive to the deep south. It's just more prevalent.

Ahem the number of people who voted to ban gay marriage in California is greater than the entire population of Alabama. Further, in California 70% of blacks and 54% of Hispanics voted to ban gay marriage. So if the left or gay community has some issue with Alabama on gay marriage I think they need to speak to their own Democratic party base down there. KABOOM!!
It's stupid to put civil rights up for a popular vote, the people who organized such unconstitutional initiatives had to know they were eventually doomed.
Marriage isn't a civil right.
The supreme court has ruled otherwise. So yes it is.
The people ruled otherwise. The people should trump the supreme court.
No, they really shouldn't. Sometimes the people craft foolish and unconstitutional laws.
 
States have always had the right to define marriage- subject to constitutional guarantees.

The Supreme Court has overturned State marriage laws at least 3 times- all based upon equal treatment claims.
On sexual preferences? I call bull.

Call whatever you want.

You are obsessed about sexual preferences- the Supreme Court was focusing on equal treatment before the law, and that marriage is an individual right that can only be denied when the State can demonstrate a specific State interest that is accomplished by denying that right.
States have an interest in maintaining the nuclear family.
What interest is that?
perpetuating the tax paying species.

Gay people pay taxes as well. Do you honesty believe birth rates in the nation are suddenly going to drop if gay folks get hitched? I certainly don't.
 
Baker v. Nelson made marriage an issue for the states. If the SCOTUS overrules their own ruling in favor of homosexual marriage and claims there is a federal right to marriage, the game is over. The pushback from folks like the Duggars, the Duck Dynasty, F. Graham and tens of millions of other individuals and groups will be enormous. There never has been a right to marriage.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly said that there is a specific individual right to marriage- where have you been?

Loving v Virginia

"The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men."

"Marriage is one of the 'basic civil rights of man,' fundamental to our very existence and survival."

Zablocki v. Rehail

AlthoughLovingarose in the context of racial discrimination, prior and subsequent decisions of this Court confirm that the right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals.

Maynard v. Hill,125 U. S. 190(1888), the Court characterized marriage as "the most important relation in life,"id.at125 U. S. 205, and as "the foundation of the family and of society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress,"

InMeyer v. Nebraska,262 U. S. 390(1923), the Court recognized that the right "to marry, establish a home and bring up children" is a central part of the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause,

InGriswold v. Connecticut,381 U. S. 479(1965), the Court observed:

"We deal with a right of privacy older than the Bill of Rights -- older than our political parties, older than our school system. Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred. It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects. Yet it is an association for as noble a purpose as any involved in our prior decisions."

Carey v. Population Services International,431 U. S. 678(1977)

"While the outer limits of [the right of personal privacy] have not been marked by the Court, it is clear that among the decisions that an individual may make without unjustified government interference are personal decisions 'relating to marriage,

Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur

"This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment"
 
Same sex couples are being denied the right to enter into the contractual agreement that opposite sex couples are allowed to enter into,

and thus are being singled out to be denied any benefits that contract provides.
Couples do not have rights. Individuals have rights.

States give couples rights when they pass laws that offer potential benefit to couples. Once the state has taken that step, they are subject to comply with the Constitutional mandates on equal protection.
No, states grant privileges, not rights. Your argument sucks, and it conflates a "right to marriage" with the benefits that accrue from that right.
Total fail.
You keep saying such things as one state after another legalizes gay marriage.
Almost no states have legalized gay marriage It has been imposed on them by an acitivist judiciary undermining the wll of the people. If people actually voted for that crap I could accept it. as legitimate.

What Bs- you willl never accept it.

So Rabbi.

Loving v. Virginia- important ruling for marriage equality or a ruling that imposed mixed race marriage by an activist judiciary undermining the rule of the people?
 
Ignorance isn't exclusive to the deep south. It's just more prevalent.

Ahem the number of people who voted to ban gay marriage in California is greater than the entire population of Alabama. Further, in California 70% of blacks and 54% of Hispanics voted to ban gay marriage. So if the left or gay community has some issue with Alabama on gay marriage I think they need to speak to their own Democratic party base down there. KABOOM!!
It's stupid to put civil rights up for a popular vote, the people who organized such unconstitutional initiatives had to know they were eventually doomed.
Marriage isn't a civil right.
The supreme court has ruled otherwise. So yes it is.
The people ruled otherwise. The people should trump the supreme court.

So you think that that Loving v. Virginia was wrong?
 
I don't need to dispute anything. Marriage is the joining of two people.
That isn't in the Constitution. States have always defined who could get married. There's no reason three or more couldn't marry if we are going to let marriage be defined as people want. Gay marriage activists are hypocritical to reject traditional marriage while staking their claim to the aspects of traditional marriage they want.

Change the Constitution to include sexual orientations of individuals to be protected like race, religion or gender and you'll at least have an honest argument.

States have always had the right to define marriage- subject to constitutional guarantees.

The Supreme Court has overturned State marriage laws at least 3 times- all based upon equal treatment claims.
On sexual preferences? I call bull.

Call whatever you want.

You are obsessed about sexual preferences- the Supreme Court was focusing on equal treatment before the law, and that marriage is an individual right that can only be denied when the State can demonstrate a specific State interest that is accomplished by denying that right.
States have an interest in maintaining the nuclear family.

Then the States should actually make laws that do something that maintain the nuclear family.

Laws preventing gay marriage do nothing to encourage heterosexuals to get married, or stay married- or have children.
 
States have always had the right to define marriage- subject to constitutional guarantees.

The Supreme Court has overturned State marriage laws at least 3 times- all based upon equal treatment claims.
On sexual preferences? I call bull.

Call whatever you want.

You are obsessed about sexual preferences- the Supreme Court was focusing on equal treatment before the law, and that marriage is an individual right that can only be denied when the State can demonstrate a specific State interest that is accomplished by denying that right.
States have an interest in maintaining the nuclear family.
What interest is that?
perpetuating the tax paying species.

'tax paying species'?

Marriage doesnt' perpetuate any species.

Humans have children with marriage and without marriage.
 
I don't think it's being discussed much because not a single person in the world is surprised that Alabama, the butthole of America, is on the wrong side of history yet again.

And when blacks and Hispanics voted no to gay marriage in California? I mean come on I could see that happening in Alabama but how do you explain that in California the liberal freak show state in the union.
Ignorance isn't exclusive to the deep south. It's just more prevalent.

Ahem the number of people who voted to ban gay marriage in California is greater than the entire population of Alabama. Further, in California 70% of blacks and 54% of Hispanics voted to ban gay marriage. So if the left or gay community has some issue with Alabama on gay marriage I think they need to speak to their own Democratic party base down there. KABOOM!!
It's stupid to put civil rights up for a popular vote, the people who organized such unconstitutional initiatives had to know they were eventually doomed.
Marriage isn't a civil right.

Marriage is an individual American right
 
He's an idiot, about to be slapped upside the head, again.
what a coincidence.
Unlike the good judge, I follow the law. He makes his own.

Making his own, interesting. Yes wouldn't it be nice if people in authority actually DID follow Constitutional law and didn't act on their own, such as say ..... President Obama regarding the issue of immigration and executive order. Then again, I bet you'd make exception or an excuse to THAT individual "making his own" I'm sure.
 
Barack Obama on him opposing same sex marriage.


Pay attention what he has to say about the states.
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised this isn't blowing up all over the web. It's such a hot topic, whether you agree or disagree. In Alabama, a same-sex marriage fight is upon us. Last month, a federal judge struck down the state's law against the unions. But Sunday night, "in a dramatic show of defiance toward the federal judiciary, Chief JusticeRoy S. Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court ordered the state’s probate judges not to issue marriage licenses to gay couples on Monday, the day same-sex marriages were expected to begin."

The Phantom Diaries Alabama Objects to Gay Marriage
I don't think it's being discussed much because not a single person in the world is surprised that Alabama, the butthole of America, is on the wrong side of history yet again.
other alabama issues Govenor Robert Bentley
 

Forum List

Back
Top