Idaho scrambling over same-sex marriage ban ruling

May 14, 2014 Full story: NewsOn6 Tulsa 41

Amber Beierle and Rachael Robertson say they'll be the first in line if Idaho starts issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples on Friday.

Full Story
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

DNF

“Religious Freedom to Marry”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH / Baltimore MD

#1 May 14, 2014
U.S. District Magistrate Judge Candy Dale wrote in her decision Tuesday evening that Idaho's laws barring same-sex marriage unconstitutionally deny gay and lesbian citizens their fundamental right to marry. Ten other federal district courts have issued similar rulings supporting gay marriage rights.
Dale said the state must issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples starting at 9 a.m. Friday.
"The Plaintiffs are entitled to extraordinary remedies because of their extraordinary injuries," Dale wrote, saying same-sex couples in Idaho have been denied the economic, emotional and spiritual benefits of marriage.
"Plaintiffs suffer these injuries not because they are unqualified to marry, start a family, or grow old together, but because of who they are and whom they love," she wrote.

a related story:
Kentucky ordered to pay $70K in gay marriage case

http://www.wave3.com/story/25517249/kentucky-...

when are these neo conservatives going to see that their 'morality' is bad for taxpayers, businesses, and the local economy?

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#2 May 14, 2014
DNF wrote:
when are these neo conservatives going to see that their 'morality' is bad for taxpayers, businesses, and the local economy?
You say that as if the conservatives actually cared about taxpayers, businesses, or the economy. We have ample proof that they care no more about those things than they do the constitution. All are simply talking points to them.

If they cared about the economy, would they have let the government technically default? If they cared about taxpayers, would they continue supporting the giant give-aways to highly profitable corporations? If they cared about businesses, would they allow the financial industry to continue absorbing larger and larger chunks of the economy, accomplishing nothing more than moving piles of virtual paper around?

The sad truth is that they don't care. They are perfectly willing to sabotage the government and the economy just to show they can.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#3 May 14, 2014
The courts rule against those who vote other people's civil rights away.

End of story. Discrimination is against the law.
Are you mad fundie

Philadelphia, PA

#4 May 14, 2014
DNF wrote:
when are these neo conservatives going to see that their 'morality' is bad for taxpayers, businesses, and the local economy?
Never. They don't even accept that greenhouse gases have an effect, minor or potentially severe. They don't even think vaccines are a net positive....

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#5 May 14, 2014
"Scrambling" ???!!!

Do you get toast and jelly and home fries and coffee with that ?

Who writes these moronic headlines ?!
IoanPueblo

United States

#6 May 15, 2014
Good. Let them. Glad to see that Judge Dale did not issue a stay.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

St. Louis, MO

#7 May 15, 2014
Fa-Foxy wrote:
"Scrambling" ???!!!
Do you get toast and jelly and home fries and coffee with that ?
Who writes these moronic headlines ?!
I would normally agree that headlines are somewhat confusing, but in this case the word is properly used. There is more than one accepted meaning of the word. And to answer your last question, someone who gets paid to do so. Whether he/she is overpaid is another question altogether.
etruscan

Knoxville, TN

#8 May 15, 2014
Is it just me, but has anyone noticed that gays all look alike, and the women are flat ugly?

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#9 May 15, 2014
etruscan wrote:
Is it just me, but has anyone noticed that gays all look alike, and the women are flat ugly?
And people in Tennessee are still marrying their cousins and wondering what the word "shoes" means.

DNF

“Religious Freedom to Marry”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH / Baltimore MD

#10 May 15, 2014
etruscan wrote:
Is it just me, but has anyone noticed that gays all look alike, and the women are flat ugly?
nope.

just you hon.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#11 May 15, 2014
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
You say that as if the conservatives actually cared about taxpayers, businesses, or the economy. We have ample proof that they care no more about those things than they do the constitution. All are simply talking points to them.
If they cared about the economy, would they have let the government technically default? If they cared about taxpayers, would they continue supporting the giant give-aways to highly profitable corporations? If they cared about businesses, would they allow the financial industry to continue absorbing larger and larger chunks of the economy, accomplishing nothing more than moving piles of virtual paper around?
The sad truth is that they don't care. They are perfectly willing to sabotage the government and the economy just to show they can.
Liberals are no better. Look at the wonders of Obamacare.
Wait until you see the price increases at the state exchanges for 2015.
Wait until you see company after company dropping the health care insurance benefit.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#12 May 15, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Liberals are no better. Look at the wonders of Obamacare.
Wait until you see the price increases at the state exchanges for 2015.
Wait until you see company after company dropping the health care insurance benefit.
Who cares?
Christsharians on the DL

Philadelphia, PA

#13 May 15, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Liberals are no better. Look at the wonders of Obamacare.
Shouldn't you be out looking for the Rhodesian birth certificate?

I think it's Rhodesia and not Kenya or Indonesia now.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#14 May 15, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Liberals are no better. Look at the wonders of Obamacare.
Wait until you see the price increases at the state exchanges for 2015.
Wait until you see company after company dropping the health care insurance benefit.
Right. Because insurers never raised rates until Obamacare came along.

Haven't they been predicting giant increases in premiums due to Obamacare mandates that already took effect--like free physicals and colonoscopies? Haven't they been predicting giant increases because of the new out-of-pocket limits and the end to life-time caps? And insurance premiums have not been growing as fast as we've historically experienced since Obamacare passed.

And when premiums don't double this fall, you'll still be chirping "Just wait! Just wait! You'll be sorry." And when employers keep hiring full-time help, you'll find yet another diversion.

You'll be wrong (as you usually are). But you won't admit it (which you never have yet).
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#15 May 15, 2014
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Right. Because insurers never raised rates until Obamacare came along.
Haven't they been predicting giant increases in premiums due to Obamacare mandates that already took effect--like free physicals and colonoscopies? Haven't they been predicting giant increases because of the new out-of-pocket limits and the end to life-time caps? And insurance premiums have not been growing as fast as we've historically experienced since Obamacare passed.
And when premiums don't double this fall, you'll still be chirping "Just wait! Just wait! You'll be sorry." And when employers keep hiring full-time help, you'll find yet another diversion.
You'll be wrong (as you usually are). But you won't admit it (which you never have yet).
They aren't going to double. The consensus seems to be 8% to 12%, some higher exceptions. The number of employers that will stop offering health care insurance is expected to increase by 45% to 60% over the next two or three years. They will be unable to keep up with the increases.

My personal view is this is an attempt by government to get people off of government health care. Sole purpose is to reduce cost to government.

In Massachusetts, the reason that was given for high premiums and super sized premium increases was that not enough people were insured. Now that we have something like 96% insured the rates continue to climb two or three or more times inflation.

Take a look at what you are getting for the money. You see your doctor once or twice each year and he charges you $200 to $250 for 10 minutes and has no clue about you. What a job. Doctors are guilty of billions in fraud each year. I used to think used car salesmen were the worst, not anymore. Used care salesmen could learn something from these thieves.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#16 May 15, 2014
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Right. Because insurers never raised rates until Obamacare came along.
Haven't they been predicting giant increases in premiums due to Obamacare mandates that already took effect--like free physicals and colonoscopies? Haven't they been predicting giant increases because of the new out-of-pocket limits and the end to life-time caps? And insurance premiums have not been growing as fast as we've historically experienced since Obamacare passed.
And when premiums don't double this fall, you'll still be chirping "Just wait! Just wait! You'll be sorry." And when employers keep hiring full-time help, you'll find yet another diversion.
You'll be wrong (as you usually are). But you won't admit it (which you never have yet).
OBAMACARE violates The Bill Of RIGHTS.
Christsharians on the DL

Philadelphia, PA

#17 May 15, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
They aren't
You're an idiot. You're off topic. You're unglued. Your thoughts are puerile.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#18 May 15, 2014
Christsharians on the DL wrote:
<quoted text>
You're an idiot. You're off topic. You're unglued. Your thoughts are puerile.
And you're obviously a schizophrenic and suffering from multiple personality disorder.

Another 7 seconds........

Maybe you're the evil spawn of David Moore ?

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#19 May 15, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
They aren't going to double. The consensus seems to be 8% to 12%...
We shall see. They could be twice that or half that. Either way, it would not be so unusual that it would prove anything about Obamacare one way or the other.

Obamacare was always intended to lead to government guidance to bring down persistent medical inflation costs. We wouldn't have Obamacare if medical costs were not already eating up more of GDP than food and utilities. Unfortunately, it was politically impossible to pass meaningful cost containment measures with the first implementation of Obamacare. But we will begin gathering the data that can help us create future programs.

DNF

“Religious Freedom to Marry”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH / Baltimore MD

#22 May 15, 2014
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Right. Because insurers never raised rates until Obamacare came along.
Haven't they been predicting giant increases in premiums due to Obamacare mandates that already took effect--like free physicals and colonoscopies? Haven't they been predicting giant increases because of the new out-of-pocket limits and the end to life-time caps? And insurance premiums have not been growing as fast as we've historically experienced since Obamacare passed.
And when premiums don't double this fall, you'll still be chirping "Just wait! Just wait! You'll be sorry." And when employers keep hiring full-time help, you'll find yet another diversion.
You'll be wrong (as you usually are). But you won't admit it (which you never have yet).
It's part of the same BS plan they use to fight against increasing the minimum wage, the old "just wait and see what happens" doom and gloom.

Meanwhile, much of what they say they are afraid will happen, ends up happening because they support it.

Like ministers facing jail because of SSM. Of course the fact that it's ministers who support SSM or County Clerks who support us that face prison if they do anything to help us marry.

So much for the "small government" neo-conservatives keep claiming they want.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
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.

California Government Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 52 min Earthling-1 46,556
California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) 11 hr just a post 5,064
Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 19 hr langles 200,930
Crude-by-rail: One federal inspector oversees a... Sat quake faults up h... 1
Calif. Lawmaker: Leadership Could Free Marine J... Sat I can read 24
California Takes a Stand Against Gay and Trans ... Sep 12 Frankie Rizzo 172
New Report: Offshore Fracking Threatens Califor... Sep 11 over 1
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

California Government People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••