Louisiana Strikes Down Gay Marriage Ban

[Seawytch]

Why is that a good thing?

Because it wouldn't have passed until the 90s...in some states it still might not.

The 90s? LOL, I lived in Virgina many years, you're full of shit. Courts have done far more damage making law than the few things they have done right.

Yes, according to Gallup, interracial marriage didn't enjoy majority support of voters until the mid 1990s.
So, you think Loving was a bad decision?

At least Loving followed the technical aspect of the law, but I see no reason government should be involved in all the things it insists on being involved with and the people go along with. Government should be a referee, not a kindergarten teacher. Gay judges are just making up law though.

The Loving case is refered to constantly by gay marriage advocates as an appeal to emotion tho they know...or should that it is irrelevant to their case.
Quoting Wikipedia on Loving v Virginia:
Chief Justice Earl Warren's opinion for the unanimous court held that:

“

Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.

”

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

The court concluded that anti-miscegenation laws were racist and had been enacted to perpetuate white supremacy:

“

There is patently no legitimate overriding purpose independent of invidious racial discrimination which justifies this classification. The fact that Virginia prohibits only interracial marriages involving white persons demonstrates that the racial classifications must stand on their own justification, as measures designed to maintain White Supremacy.

”

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Associate Justice Potter Stewart filed a brief concurring opinion. He reiterated his opinion from McLaughlin v. Florida that "it is simply not possible for a state law to be valid under our Constitution which makes the criminality of an act depend upon the race of the actor."

Guess what? The courts are concluding that anti gay laws are based solely on animus towards gay people. They are being struck down left and right for just that reason. There is no difference between discrimination based on race and discrimination based on gender.

It was argued for almost 100 years that anti miscegenation laws were not discrimination because it affected blacks and whites equally. They argued (kinda like Kaz is) that blacks could marry blacks and whites could marry whites and therefore no discrimination occurred.

 

[Seawytch]

The issue of gay marriage should and is being "decided" the same way interracial marriage was "decided". Good thing voters didn't get to vote on that.

Why is that a good thing?

Because it wouldn't have passed until the 90s...in some states it still might not.

The 90s? LOL, I lived in Virgina many years, you're full of shit. Courts have done far more damage making law than the few things they have done right.

Courts don't make laws...they strike laws down if they are unconstitutional.

Judges if one is to be accurate, and in this case they are acting unconstitutional.

You guys are hysterical, really. There have been over a dozen rulings and they've all ruled the anti-gay laws unconstitutional, but the sky is a different color in ya'lls world. It's the judges ruling against you that are unconstitutional. You should take your comedy show on the road, seriously.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“Judges if one is to be accurate, and in this case they are acting unconstitutional.”


Nonsense.


These measures are being invalidated in accordance with settled and accepted 14th Amendment jurisprudence.

 

[kaz]

The issue of gay marriage should and is being "decided" the same way interracial marriage was "decided". Good thing voters didn't get to vote on that.

Why is that a good thing?

Because it wouldn't have passed until the 90s...in some states it still might not.

The 90s? LOL, I lived in Virgina many years, you're full of shit. Courts have done far more damage making law than the few things they have done right.

Courts don't make laws...they strike laws down if they are unconstitutional.

Not really following the conversation, are you?

 

[kaz]

It was argued for almost 100 years that anti miscegenation laws were not discrimination because it affected blacks and whites equally. They argued (kinda like Kaz is) that blacks could marry blacks and whites could marry whites and therefore no discrimination occurred.

You need to find Jesus and be saved, homosexuality is a greater sin than murder, you will go to a special place in hell.

 

[kaz]

You guys are hysterical, really. There have been over a dozen rulings and they've all ruled the anti-gay laws unconstitutional, but the sky is a different color in ya'lls world. It's the judges ruling against you that are unconstitutional. You should take your comedy show on the road, seriously.

So what you have is ... but I want it, waaahhhhhh, judge, make life fair for me, give me free stuff, validate me. I'm gay, tell me I'm OK. But I don't want to do any actual work, you do it for me. Boo hoo, woe is me. Sob, sob.

Here's a cookie and a tissue, run along and play.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Louisiana judge Gay marriage ban unconstitutional

One more down.

All 50 states are going to go this way as it's the only legal and logical conclusion possible.

Two legal-aged adults may enter into any financial contract with one another already. Marriage,, insofar as the law is concerned is merely another financial contract. Game over.

 

[Redfish]

Louisiana judge Gay marriage ban unconstitutional

One more down.

All 50 states are going to go this way as it's the only legal and logical conclusion possible.

Two legal-aged adults may enter into any financial contract with one another already. Marriage,, insofar as the law is concerned is merely another financial contract. Game over.

OK, if that is your position, then get ready for bigamy, polygamy, father/son, mother/daughter, sibling, and all other possible forms of human groupings. BECAUSE, as you said, if gay marriage becomes legal on the basis of discrimination then there is no possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage since those people will also claim that they are being discriminated against by our marriage laws.

You get what you ask for, just be sure you understand what you are asking for.

 

[bodecea]

Louisiana judge Gay marriage ban unconstitutional

One more down.

All 50 states are going to go this way as it's the only legal and logical conclusion possible.

Two legal-aged adults may enter into any financial contract with one another already. Marriage,, insofar as the law is concerned is merely another financial contract. Game over.

OK, if that is your position, then get ready for bigamy, polygamy, father/son, mother/daughter, sibling, and all other possible forms of human groupings. BECAUSE, as you said, if gay marriage becomes legal on the basis of discrimination then there is no possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage since those people will also claim that they are being discriminated against by our marriage laws.

You get what you ask for, just be sure you understand what you are asking for.

If what you say is true...if straight marriage is legal on the basis of discrimination, then there is not possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Louisiana judge Gay marriage ban unconstitutional

One more down.

All 50 states are going to go this way as it's the only legal and logical conclusion possible.

Two legal-aged adults may enter into any financial contract with one another already. Marriage,, insofar as the law is concerned is merely another financial contract. Game over.

OK, if that is your position, then get ready for bigamy, polygamy, father/son, mother/daughter, sibling, and all other possible forms of human groupings. BECAUSE, as you said, if gay marriage becomes legal on the basis of discrimination then there is no possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage since those people will also claim that they are being discriminated against by our marriage laws.

You get what you ask for, just be sure you understand what you are asking for.

Unlike you, I don't involve myself in other people's marriages. If two (or more) people wanna wed and become miserable and loose all interest in having sex together that's their thing.

 

[Seawytch]

You guys are hysterical, really. There have been over a dozen rulings and they've all ruled the anti-gay laws unconstitutional, but the sky is a different color in ya'lls world. It's the judges ruling against you that are unconstitutional. You should take your comedy show on the road, seriously.

So what you have is ... but I want it, waaahhhhhh, judge, make life fair for me, give me free stuff, validate me. I'm gay, tell me I'm OK. But I don't want to do any actual work, you do it for me. Boo hoo, woe is me. Sob, sob.

Here's a cookie and a tissue, run along and play.

So what you have is....waaaahhhhh "activist judges" (read: judges not ruling against those icky gays)

Is that how you feel about the Lovings case, that they needed the judge to make life fair for them, that they need validating? Did you feel validated by your civil marriage and feel that it is the reason you got married?

You're just mad 'cause we're winning and our legal marriages are just like yours in 19 states and counting. Woe is you.

P.S. We should find out soon if the SCOTUS is going to address this next year.

 

[Seawytch]

Louisiana judge Gay marriage ban unconstitutional

One more down.

All 50 states are going to go this way as it's the only legal and logical conclusion possible.

Two legal-aged adults may enter into any financial contract with one another already. Marriage,, insofar as the law is concerned is merely another financial contract. Game over.

OK, if that is your position, then get ready for bigamy, polygamy, father/son, mother/daughter, sibling, and all other possible forms of human groupings. BECAUSE, as you said, if gay marriage becomes legal on the basis of discrimination then there is no possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage since those people will also claim that they are being discriminated against by our marriage laws.

You get what you ask for, just be sure you understand what you are asking for.

If what you say is true...if straight marriage is legal on the basis of discrimination, then there is not possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage.

But what he says isn't true. The "slippery slope" hasn't slid in any of the countries with marriage equality.

 

[Seawytch]

It was argued for almost 100 years that anti miscegenation laws were not discrimination because it affected blacks and whites equally. They argued (kinda like Kaz is) that blacks could marry blacks and whites could marry whites and therefore no discrimination occurred.

You need to find Jesus and be saved, homosexuality is a greater sin than murder, you will go to a special place in hell.

I found Jesus...he was at the Devil's wedding having a drink with Judas to show him there were no hard feelings.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Louisiana judge Gay marriage ban unconstitutional

One more down.

All 50 states are going to go this way as it's the only legal and logical conclusion possible.

Two legal-aged adults may enter into any financial contract with one another already. Marriage,, insofar as the law is concerned is merely another financial contract. Game over.

OK, if that is your position, then get ready for bigamy, polygamy, father/son, mother/daughter, sibling, and all other possible forms of human groupings. BECAUSE, as you said, if gay marriage becomes legal on the basis of discrimination then there is no possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage since those people will also claim that they are being discriminated against by our marriage laws.

You get what you ask for, just be sure you understand what you are asking for.

If what you say is true...if straight marriage is legal on the basis of discrimination, then there is not possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage.

But what he says isn't true. The "slippery slope" hasn't slid in any of the countries with marriage equality.

Israel recognizes polyganous marriages from other countries for immigrants, though they wont do them domestically.

 

[Seawytch]

Louisiana judge Gay marriage ban unconstitutional

One more down.

All 50 states are going to go this way as it's the only legal and logical conclusion possible.

Two legal-aged adults may enter into any financial contract with one another already. Marriage,, insofar as the law is concerned is merely another financial contract. Game over.

OK, if that is your position, then get ready for bigamy, polygamy, father/son, mother/daughter, sibling, and all other possible forms of human groupings. BECAUSE, as you said, if gay marriage becomes legal on the basis of discrimination then there is no possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage since those people will also claim that they are being discriminated against by our marriage laws.

You get what you ask for, just be sure you understand what you are asking for.

If what you say is true...if straight marriage is legal on the basis of discrimination, then there is not possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage.

But what he says isn't true. The "slippery slope" hasn't slid in any of the countries with marriage equality.

Israel recognizes polyganous marriages from other countries for immigrants, though they wont do them domestically.

But which came first?

 

[kaz]

You guys are hysterical, really. There have been over a dozen rulings and they've all ruled the anti-gay laws unconstitutional, but the sky is a different color in ya'lls world. It's the judges ruling against you that are unconstitutional. You should take your comedy show on the road, seriously.

So what you have is ... but I want it, waaahhhhhh, judge, make life fair for me, give me free stuff, validate me. I'm gay, tell me I'm OK. But I don't want to do any actual work, you do it for me. Boo hoo, woe is me. Sob, sob.

Here's a cookie and a tissue, run along and play.

So what you have is....waaaahhhhh "activist judges" (read: judges not ruling against those icky gays)

Is that how you feel about the Lovings case, that they needed the judge to make life fair for them, that they need validating? Did you feel validated by your civil marriage and feel that it is the reason you got married?

You're just mad 'cause we're winning and our legal marriages are just like yours in 19 states and counting. Woe is you.

P.S. We should find out soon if the SCOTUS is going to address this next year.

Find God and you will be saved. The bible says homosexuality is an abomination. Jesus even said queers will get his particular wrath. When asked if the path to God is through him, he replied, yeah, for straights it is.

 

[Redfish]

Louisiana judge Gay marriage ban unconstitutional

One more down.

All 50 states are going to go this way as it's the only legal and logical conclusion possible.

Two legal-aged adults may enter into any financial contract with one another already. Marriage,, insofar as the law is concerned is merely another financial contract. Game over.

OK, if that is your position, then get ready for bigamy, polygamy, father/son, mother/daughter, sibling, and all other possible forms of human groupings. BECAUSE, as you said, if gay marriage becomes legal on the basis of discrimination then there is no possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage since those people will also claim that they are being discriminated against by our marriage laws.

You get what you ask for, just be sure you understand what you are asking for.

Unlike you, I don't involve myself in other people's marriages. If two (or more) people wanna wed and become miserable and loose all interest in having sex together that's their thing.

it is not intruding on others happiness or misery. Its about preserving a sane and moral society. Its also about maintaining sanity in our legal system. Can you imagine how a divorce of a marriage of 5 men and 6 women would play out? How much court time and money would such a fiasco tie up?

this is about much more than allowing two gays to legally hook up. I want gays to be able to have a legal mutual committment agreement. Its when you call it a marriage that all of the unwanted results start to pile up.

 

[Redfish]

Louisiana judge Gay marriage ban unconstitutional

One more down.

All 50 states are going to go this way as it's the only legal and logical conclusion possible.

Two legal-aged adults may enter into any financial contract with one another already. Marriage,, insofar as the law is concerned is merely another financial contract. Game over.

OK, if that is your position, then get ready for bigamy, polygamy, father/son, mother/daughter, sibling, and all other possible forms of human groupings. BECAUSE, as you said, if gay marriage becomes legal on the basis of discrimination then there is no possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage since those people will also claim that they are being discriminated against by our marriage laws.

You get what you ask for, just be sure you understand what you are asking for.

If what you say is true...if straight marriage is legal on the basis of discrimination, then there is not possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage.

But what he says isn't true. The "slippery slope" hasn't slid in any of the countries with marriage equality.

Not yet. But put the ACLU on the case and it will happen. I guarantee it. As I said, there is no viable legal defense that can be presented to stop it.

 

[Redfish]

All 50 states are going to go this way as it's the only legal and logical conclusion possible.

Two legal-aged adults may enter into any financial contract with one another already. Marriage,, insofar as the law is concerned is merely another financial contract. Game over.

OK, if that is your position, then get ready for bigamy, polygamy, father/son, mother/daughter, sibling, and all other possible forms of human groupings. BECAUSE, as you said, if gay marriage becomes legal on the basis of discrimination then there is no possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage since those people will also claim that they are being discriminated against by our marriage laws.

You get what you ask for, just be sure you understand what you are asking for.

If what you say is true...if straight marriage is legal on the basis of discrimination, then there is not possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage.

But what he says isn't true. The "slippery slope" hasn't slid in any of the countries with marriage equality.

Israel recognizes polyganous marriages from other countries for immigrants, though they wont do them domestically.

But which came first?

Islam recognizes polygamy but not homosexuality. But yet, american liberals embrace islam and refuse to call it a religion of hate. The liberal mind is genetically defective.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Louisiana judge Gay marriage ban unconstitutional

One more down.

All 50 states are going to go this way as it's the only legal and logical conclusion possible.

Two legal-aged adults may enter into any financial contract with one another already. Marriage,, insofar as the law is concerned is merely another financial contract. Game over.

OK, if that is your position, then get ready for bigamy, polygamy, father/son, mother/daughter, sibling, and all other possible forms of human groupings. BECAUSE, as you said, if gay marriage becomes legal on the basis of discrimination then there is no possible legal defense that can be brought forward to prohibit all other forms of marriage since those people will also claim that they are being discriminated against by our marriage laws.

You get what you ask for, just be sure you understand what you are asking for.

Unlike you, I don't involve myself in other people's marriages. If two (or more) people wanna wed and become miserable and loose all interest in having sex together that's their thing.

it is not intruding on others happiness or misery. Its about preserving a sane and moral society. Its also about maintaining sanity in our legal system. Can you imagine how a divorce of a marriage of 5 men and 6 women would play out? How much court time and money would such a fiasco tie up?

this is about much more than allowing two gays to legally hook up. I want gays to be able to have a legal mutual committment agreement. Its when you call it a marriage that all of the unwanted results start to pile up.

Religious objections to gay marriage aren't valid where the law is concerned. For starters, reliigons which might forbid such marriages didn't invent the institution of marriage. So their objections are irrelevant. For another, religion has no support under US law insofar as the law incorporating a specific religion's tenets into laws applicable to everyone - not everyone belongs to the religion with a bug up it's butt about gay marriage.