Same-sex couples want to drop governor, AG in suit

Aug 23, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: KAIT-TV

LITTLE ROCK, AR - Lawyers for a group of same-sex couples seeking to overturn Arkansas' ban on gay marriage want to drop the state's governor and attorney general from a lawsuit.

Comments
1 - 20 of 48 Comments Last updated Aug 29, 2013
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

DNF

“Religious Freedom to Marry”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH / Baltimore MD

#1 Aug 23, 2013
Good idea.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#2 Aug 23, 2013
I don't see the reasoning behind this tactic.
guest

United States

#4 Aug 24, 2013
How can you possibly hold the Governor and Attorney General responsible for a Constitutional Amendment passed directly by the people through a popular vote?

I think the gay agenda crowd realizes their claims against elected officials are baseless and that the court would dismiss the Governor and AG anyway.

I don't understand why gays hate democracy. If you don't like the law in Arkansas, move to another state where the homosexual lifestyle is accepted.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#5 Aug 24, 2013
guest wrote:
How can you possibly hold the Governor and Attorney General responsible for a Constitutional Amendment passed directly by the people through a popular vote?
I think the gay agenda crowd realizes their claims against elected officials are baseless and that the court would dismiss the Governor and AG anyway.
I don't understand why gays hate democracy. If you don't like the law in Arkansas, move to another state where the homosexual lifestyle is accepted.
It's standard practice to name the Governor and Attorney General in any Suit involving the State.

Next, don't conflate "democracy" with "majority rule". In Political Science terms, they aren't the same. Not even close.

Consider:

" ... The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections ... "

from:

JACKSON, J., Opinion of the Court
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
319 U.S. 624

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette 1943

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/histori...

Consider, too ...

Constitution of the United States of America

ARTICLE. IV.
SECTION. 1.
Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.

SECTION. 2.
The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states

ARTICLE. VI.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
.

AMENDMENT. IX.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

AMENDMENT. XIV.
SECTION. 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/con...

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bil...

DNF

“Religious Freedom to Marry”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH / Baltimore MD

#6 Aug 24, 2013
guest wrote:
How can you possibly hold the Governor and Attorney General responsible for a Constitutional Amendment passed directly by the people through a popular vote?
I think the gay agenda crowd realizes their claims against elected officials are baseless and that the court would dismiss the Governor and AG anyway.
I don't understand why gays hate democracy. If you don't like the law in Arkansas, move to another state where the homosexual lifestyle is accepted.
You make a good point about not suing the Gov and AG. By dropping them they make it more difficult for others to oppose the lawsuit (Prop 8 for example). Other groups would lack standing.

As for the law itself, let me remind you that the people of Arkansas are part of the USA and subject to the Supreme Law of the Land the U.S. Constitution.

SSM bans violate many sections of the Constitution.

DNF

“Religious Freedom to Marry”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH / Baltimore MD

#7 Aug 24, 2013
snyper wrote:
I don't see the reasoning behind this tactic.
The Prop 8 case was remanded back to the courts because the group that appealed lacked standing.

By dropping the Gov and AG this makes it more difficult for others to oppose the lawsuit.

I'm very surprised that eluded you.

DNF

“Religious Freedom to Marry”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH / Baltimore MD

#8 Aug 24, 2013
guest wrote:
How can you possibly hold the Governor and Attorney General responsible for a Constitutional Amendment passed directly by the people through a popular vote?
I think the gay agenda crowd realizes their claims against elected officials are baseless and that the court would dismiss the Governor and AG anyway.
I don't understand why gays hate democracy. If you don't like the law in Arkansas, move to another state where the homosexual lifestyle is accepted.
AMENDMENT IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

ARTICLE VI

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

SCOTUS Majority opinion:

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette 1943

"The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections."
guest

United States

#9 Aug 25, 2013
Snyper and DNF,

There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution stating that engaging in perverted, deviant homosexual behavior is a fundamental right.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#10 Aug 25, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>The Prop 8 case was remanded back to the courts because the group that appealed lacked standing.
By dropping the Gov and AG this makes it more difficult for others to oppose the lawsuit.
I'm very surprised that eluded you.
Most States require that a suit be brought against a person or Office. Some even disallow any suits against the State proper.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#11 Aug 25, 2013
guest wrote:
Snyper and DNF,
There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution stating that engaging in perverted, deviant homosexual behavior is a fundamental right.
AMENDMENT. IX.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Your personal view of gay relationships is your (unsupported) opinion, and Right.

There is nothing that requires Government to take any notice of it whatsoever in crafting the Laws that effect ALL the sovereign Citizens of this Nation.

Since: Mar 07

The entire US of A

#12 Aug 25, 2013
guest wrote:
Snyper and DNF,
There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution stating that engaging in perverted, deviant homosexual behavior is a fundamental right.
You believe marriage is perverted and deviant?

I pity your poor spouse.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#14 Aug 25, 2013
Nathan wrote:
<quoted text>
If it's a phony "marriage" between two fagg@ts, yes it is!
I suspect it is your definition that is lacking.
Nathan

Netherlands

#15 Aug 25, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
I suspect it is your definition that is lacking.
Really? Why the double standard? The so called "same sex" couples say they have rights and yet my relationship with my 9 year old is considered bad by a lot of the same people that support the sodomites. Are you one of those hypocrites too?
guest

United States

#16 Aug 25, 2013
snyper wrote:
AMENDMENT. IX.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
I love the 9th Amendment, but it doesn't specifically enumerate any right, nor does it support the idea that engaging in perverted, deviant homosexual behavior is a fundamental right.

You lose. Want to play again?
guest

United States

#17 Aug 25, 2013
Quest wrote:
You believe marriage is perverted and deviant?
Of course not, but engaging in homosexual acts certainly is.
BS Detector

Sherman Oaks, CA

#18 Aug 25, 2013
Nathan wrote:
<quoted text>
If it's a phony "marriage" between two fagg@ts, yes it is!
Whether or not you support same sex marriage (and I didn't), it's now legal (ergo not "phony") in several states. Deal with it.
BS Detector

Sherman Oaks, CA

#19 Aug 25, 2013
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
I love the 9th Amendment, but it doesn't specifically enumerate any right, nor does it support the idea that engaging in perverted, deviant homosexual behavior is a fundamental right.
You lose. Want to play again?
If you can read, the 9th Amendment does not specifically enumerate nor prohibit perverted or deviant (purely subjective assessments) behavior. I'm a breeder and in my experience, some so-called "perverted" or so called "deviant" behaviors between two (or more) consenting adults can be downright fun!

You lose. Want to play again?

Since: Mar 07

The entire US of A

#20 Aug 25, 2013
Nathan wrote:
<quoted text>
If it's a phony "marriage" between two fagg@ts, yes it is!
You are a bit confused. If there is a legal marriage license issues, then it's a real marriage.

They don't come with "".

Since: Mar 07

The entire US of A

#21 Aug 25, 2013
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course not, but engaging in homosexual acts certainly is.
Guess what homosexual act I engaged in today?

I harvested peppers from my garden and canned 3 quarts of hot pepper relish! My first time canning ANYTHING.

I don't really see the moral implications, there, but if you say that picking peppers is a problem, then who am I to disagree?
BS Detector

Sherman Oaks, CA

#22 Aug 25, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Guess what homosexual act I engaged in today?
I harvested peppers from my garden and canned 3 quarts of hot pepper relish! My first time canning ANYTHING.
I don't really see the moral implications, there, but if you say that picking peppers is a problem, then who am I to disagree?
Peppers? Eeew! That's disgusting! Tomatoes, I could understand, and if pressed, I would have to admit that I had engaged in that activity when I was young and stupid. Now that I'm old and lazy, I can only sit back and recall the impetuous days of my wild youth.(Peppers, indeed!)

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
California Takes a Stand Against Gay and Trans ... 5 min Cale 6
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 13 min the real Jonah1 49,467
Residents see Europe best for gays and lesbians... 14 min TomInElPaso 28
Judge critical of states defending gay marriage... 15 min concersuxs 63
Is Vladimir Putin Another Adolf Hitler? 22 min Ethan Allen 885
Legislature Says No to "Gay Panic" Defense 27 min Wondering 82
Walking Dead creator hints Daryl could be gay 33 min Gremlin 31
Supreme Court: Was gay marriage settled in 1972... 38 min TomInElPaso 502
Gay Marriage Vs. the First Amendment 1 hr Frankie Rizzo 386
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 1 hr Reverend Alan 54,845
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Gay/Lesbian People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••