Gay Rights Fight Judge strikes down O...

Gay Rights Fight Judge strikes down Okla. same-sex marriage ban

There are 108 comments on the Fox News story from Jan 14, 2014, titled Gay Rights Fight Judge strikes down Okla. same-sex marriage ban. In it, Fox News reports that:

U.S. District Judge Terrence Kern handed down the ruling in a lawsuit filed by two same-sex couples.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Fox News.

First Prev
of 6
Next Last
chief22

El Paso, TX

#119 Jan 16, 2014
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>Here's a dose of some of that ORIGINAL INTENT folks like to toss around.

ARTICLE 4 [Legal Status of the Constitution]
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
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.

"It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must, of necessity, expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the Courts must decide on the operation of each."
- Chief Justice John Marshall; Marbury v Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)
__________
"The courts were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and the legislature, in order, among other things, to keep the latter within the limits assigned to their authority. The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges as, a fundamental law. It, therefore, belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents."
- Alexander Hamilton; Federalist No. 78

As for immorality, you just described the anti-gays. Did you know that it's legal to jail a minster in Indiana for presiding over a religious SSM? You call jailing clergy moral?
You do know that the original intent the Constitution applied to the Federal Government and here holding federal office.
Jeeesus Sheeeria

Philadelphia, PA

#120 Jan 16, 2014
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
With the exception, perhaps, of the North Marianas a "commonwealth" has no Federal legal existence. Even they are legally a U.S. Territory, whatever else they may choose to call themselves domestically.
More nonsense from the willfully uninformed.

There are four Commonwealths in the continental United States.

It is a fact, if a semantic fact.

Just as including or not including D.C. in a count of "states" with marriage equality is a harmless semantic point. One to be gently mocked...which will then be totally misunderstood by the gay fussbudget who's not too clear on much of anything.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#121 Jan 16, 2014
chief22 wrote:
<quoted text>
You do know that the original intent the Constitution applied to the Federal Government and here holding federal office.
What is the first mandate mentioned in its Preamble ?
hi hi

Lancaster, PA

#122 Jan 16, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
Ah, yet another forum which has devolved into childish name calling & meaningless threats.
I think everyone stopped waiting to hear the *reason* that someone gay should EVER have to suffer any of that in the slightest. Even the so-called "biblical reason" is senseless: So they can procreate. OH WAIT, but that doesn't *explain* anything, it doesn't stand reasonably, nor does it make sense: Those who choose not to procreate are not vehemently and viciously and endlessly attacked, OH WAIT, LIKE PRIESTS WHO ARE CELIBATE UNDER THE DIRECTION,*WHOOPS*!, OF THE CHURCH!

It's mind-blowing. The church can violate God's directive, but a gay person's *inability to choose their orientation* cannot. And the antigay wonder why they are attacked back. It's incredible.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#123 Jan 16, 2014
Christsharia Law wrote:
Fk you [email protected], you being the one with either a peter up your a:ss or in your mouth, are the one who needs help. Mental illness is a terrible thing to bare.
You have an awful lot of homoerotic fantasies for a straight boy.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#124 Jan 16, 2014
Jeeesus Sheeeria wrote:
<quoted text>
More nonsense from the willfully uninformed.
There are four Commonwealths in the continental United States.
It is a fact, if a semantic fact.
Just as including or not including D.C. in a count of "states" with marriage equality is a harmless semantic point. One to be gently mocked...which will then be totally misunderstood by the gay fussbudget who's not too clear on much of anything.
"Semantics" ?

Even a comma matters in the Law.
Launch Officer

Philadelphia, PA

#125 Jan 16, 2014
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
"Semantics" ?
Even a comma matters in the Law.
Yes, semantic.

You cannot describe any material difference between PA's status as a commonwealth versus NY's status as a state.

It is a semantic difference, and one that's vaguely fun to play with. Get a grip.

Now, with the originating question of D.C. harmlessly being called a state, we can all recognize that there are actual differences for D.C. in being a district. But that doesn't mean it's a big deal if someone just includes D.C. in a count of how many "states" have marriage equality.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#126 Jan 17, 2014
chief22 wrote:
<quoted text>
You do know that the original intent the Constitution applied to the Federal Government and here holding federal office.
??????

lmao

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.

ARTICLE 4 [Legal Status of the Constitution]

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 6
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.

Transgender Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Eating disorders on the rise 34 min One of Righteousness 5
I need sexy massage in Jeddah (May '13) 55 min Yousef 85
News NBA Moves All-Star Game Out of North Carolina O... 1 hr Christsharian Col... 27
News Courtney Stodden shares nude patriotic portrait... 2 hr Geva 1
Massage in Jeddah ASAP (Sep '13) 3 hr Abo _mody 576
News County is one of the best for supporting young ... 7 hr Ramses 2
Massage in Dammam or Khobar 15 hr TinySam 6
More from around the web