Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

The Macaroni posted:

Appeals about what and by whom?

For a stay on gay marriages by opponents

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

thefncrow posted:

I'm not quite sure what you're asking.

Utah has appealed this ruling to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

They went to the 10th Circuit asking for a stay on the ruling until the original judge ruled on whether they were entitled to a stay pending appeal, which was rejected.

They went to the original judge and asked him to stay his ruling pending the 10th Circuit appeals process, which was rejected.

After losing that, they asked the 10th Circuit to grant a stay until the appeal was completed, which was rejected.

They've now asked SCOTUS for the same stay, and I don't think there's been a response, but that's unlikely to be granted.

Yup this is what I was looking for. I knew that it was more than once

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Went to the movies today and one of the previews was a Fathom Events feature called



quote:

NCM Fathom Events, Focus on the Family™ and Pine Creek Entertainment invite you to explore important questions about what is family in the one-night cinema event Irreplaceable . Broadcast to movie theaters nationwide on Tuesday, May 6 at 7:30pm (local time), join host Tim Sisarich (Executive Director of Focus on the Family™ New Zealand) as he meets with experts around the globe to seek answers to this fascinating question.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BF2wEgIOSMQ
Here is the trailer. Subtle at times and overt at other times, this documentary is looking at what "is a traditional family" and "traditional marriage"

Mr Ice Cream Glove fucked around with this message at 00:38 on Dec 28, 2013

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

On topic of LGBT news

The rose bowl is going to have a gay marriage on one of the floats

Gay scouts are now able to join January 1st

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

GROVER CURES HOUSE posted:

Freep's been melting down over this one for a while now and it's wonderful. :allears:

I forget where I saw it but some stupid Facebook group wants people to bring a duck call when it happens and sound it off when it gets to where they are standing.

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

SedanChair posted:

But won't everyone join Bigot Scouts?

Trail Life USA: where our motto is, "no homo."
They make themselves quite clear

quote:

All boys are welcome to the program regardless of religion, race, national origin or socio-economic status.

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Now that hunger strike rear end in a top hat is going to think he succeeded by fasting.

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Brigadier Sockface posted:

Is there a number published somewhere?

U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby ruled Dec. 20 that the state's ban on same-sex marriage violates gay and lesbian couples' constitutional rights. Since then, more than 900 same-sex couples have tied the knot.

from USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/01/06/supreme-court-halts-utah-gay-marriage/4338799/

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

gently caress

quote:

The office of Utah Governor Gary Herbert (R) said same-sex couples who were married after the state's ban on gay marriage was struck down, but before the Supreme Court halted gay marriages in the state, will not be recognized as legally married.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/08/utah-gay-marriage_n_4562488.html

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007



Courtesy of NOM (National Organization for Marriage)

Edit:corrected acronym

Mr Ice Cream Glove fucked around with this message at 00:49 on Jan 13, 2014

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

joat mon posted:

Who is NOW, now?

Oops, National Organization for Marriage



President Brian Brown

Mr Ice Cream Glove fucked around with this message at 00:52 on Jan 13, 2014

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

I so wish I could reach through my screen and choke these people

Do we have any hope that this is going to fail?

Mr Ice Cream Glove fucked around with this message at 17:42 on Jan 13, 2014

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

This senator is ripping this girls argument about "marriage between man and woman". This is incredible

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

They are doing a fantastic job nailing these morons

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Oh joy someone from the Heritage Foundation to talk about the social idea of marriage

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

In what world is Heritage foundation a non-partisan organization?

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

I cannot wait for Dvorack to rip this rear end in a top hat apart.

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Gays=War on Poverty

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Jesus Christ

not this thrupple stuff

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Holy poo poo

Gay Marriage will mean more welfare programs

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

I am so confused, is she for or against

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Best way to protect religious liberty=ban marriage

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Close your eyes and listen

Zach Galifinakis

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

ChampRamp posted:

I haven't been watching, but have all the pro HJR3 people been pastors/ministers?

They had one lesbian speak and a lawyer speak

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

I thought I had seen every argument when it comes to the marriage for man and woman front but this is just crazy.

quote:


"Doctors Can't Be Essential, Because Some Doctors Are Bad"
JANUARY 17, 2014 AT 12:00 PM
3 163
... said no sick person, ever.

And yet this seems to have been the model of an implied argument from a pro-same-sex 'marriage' legislator in Indiana during an exchange that occurred earlier this week in the House Judiciary Committee's hearing on HJR3, the proposed Indiana marriage amendment.

During testimony from Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Kellie Fiedorek (and she did a wonderful job, by the way!), there occurred the following exchange (as reported by in a stilted article by The Raw Story). The emphasis is ours editorially:

“The only relationship that can naturally produce children is that between a man and a woman,” Fiedorek noted. “There are situations where they may not want to have children, maybe they cannot have children. But the union of one man and one woman still furthers the ideal that children, when that happens, will be born into homes with a mom and a dad.”

“You know, I had a mom and a dad and I wish my dad wasn’t there, the way he acted in my household,” [Democratic State Rep. Vernon Smith] pointed out.

This is unfortunately a frequent error in logic that arises in the marriage debate. When marriage advocates point out the unique contributions and value that men and women bring to the enterprise of marriage - and particularly the irreplaceable role of fathers (a fact observed by, among others, President Obama himself) - proponents of redefining marriage will often fall back on the failures of some fathers to try to call into question the ideal.

But reasoning from the failure of an ideal that the ideal is somehow less important is a flawed line of reasoning in any case:

Do occasional bad doctors mean we should get rid of doctors?
Does a failed inner-city charity mean we should abolish all inner-city charities?
Does the existence of asthma mean breathing is bad?
It is important, therefore, to note that a legislator who would deprive Indiana voters of their right to vote to protect marriage and to reaffirm the crucial role fathers play in children's lives is employing such a logical fallacy as this one.

There will always be exceptions to the general rule. Some children seemingly do fine even in extremely unstable family environments with only one parent, or even no parents involved in their lives. But as a rule, the evidence is overwhelming that children thrive best when raised in a stable, intact family with a mother and a father. That is what we should encourage and promote.

And this is why Indiana voters must redouble their efforts to contact their legislators and urge them to put this issue to the test of the common sense and wisdom Indiana's ordinary citizens who know better than to abandon the only institution that binds men and women to each other for the benefit of the couple, any children born of their union, and society as a whole.

Given the opportunity to vote, we are confident that the people of Indiana will preserve marriage, not abandon it!


And of course there is a planned rally in Utah

Mr Ice Cream Glove fucked around with this message at 15:41 on Jan 18, 2014

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

This is HUGE

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/08/politics/holder-same-sex-marriage-rights/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

quote:

CNN) -- The U.S. government will recognize same-sex marriages as equal to traditional marriages in all federal matters, including in U.S. courts, bankruptcies, prison visits and survivor benefits, Attorney General Eric Holder announced Saturday.

The expansion of such federal recognition will include 34 states where same-sex marriage isn't legal, but the new federal benefits being extended to those states will apply only where the U.S. government has jurisdiction, Holder said.

For example, a same-sex couple legally married in Massachusetts can now have their federal bankruptcy proceeding recognized in Alabama, even though it doesn't allow same-sex marriages. In the past, the U.S. government could challenge the couple's joint bankruptcy because Alabama doesn't recognize same-sex marriage.


Holder's announcement was revealed in an advance copy of a speech he will deliver at the Human Rights Campaign's New York City gala Saturday night.

Holder plans to announce that the Justice Department will issue a memo Monday that recognizes same-sex marriages "to the greatest extent possible under the law."

The move affects how millions of Americans interact with their federal government, including bankruptcy cases, prison visitation rights, survivor benefits for police officers and firefighters killed on the job, and the legal right to refuse to testify to incriminate a spouse.

The Human Rights Campaign, an advocate of gay rights, lauded Holder for his support of same sex marriage in a recent speech to the Swedish parliament.

In an excerpt of his speech provided in advance, Holder compared his work for the gay rights cause to the 1960s civil rights struggle and then- Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy's support for equality.

"This means that, in every courthouse, in every proceeding, and in every place where a member of the Department of Justice stands on behalf of the United States -- they will strive to ensure that same-sex marriages receive the same privileges, protections and rights as opposite-sex marriages under federal law," Holder said of his initiative.

Under the new policy, the Justice Department will recognize that same-sex spouses of individuals involved in civil and criminal cases should have the same legal rights as all other married couples -- including the right to decline to give testimony that might incriminate their spouses.

Also, the government won't contest same-sex married couples their rights in states where previously prosecutors could argue that the marriage is not recognized in the state where the couple lives, Holder said.

Couples in same-sex marriages will be allowed to file for bankruptcy as a couple. This ensures alimony and domestic support debts aren't discharged in bankruptcy cases. Federal inmates with same-sex spouses will now have full visitation, compassionate release and other benefits.

The Justice Department's policy change will extend benefits to same-sex couples who benefit from federal programs such as the Sept. 11 Victim Compensation Fund, Radiation Exposure Compensation program and to the families of police officers and firefighters who receive benefits from the Public Safety Officers' Benefits Program.

"Just like during the civil rights movement of the 1960s, the stakes involved in this generation's struggle for LGBT equality could not be higher," Holder said. "As attorney general, I will not let this Department be simply a bystander during this important moment in history."

In a statement, Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin said that "this landmark announcement will change the lives of countless committed gay and lesbian couples for the better.

"While the immediate effect of these policy decisions is that all married gay couples will be treated equally under the law, the long-term effects are more profound. Today, our nation moves closer toward its ideals of equality and fairness for all," Griffin said.

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Another state down! This comes from Right Wing nut jobs at Focus on Family

quote:

The Washington House of Representatives passed legislation on Thursday that would make it illegal for minors to receive counseling for unwanted same-sex attractions.

HB 2451 is modeled after bills passed in California and New Jersey that ban sexual-orientation change effort (SOCE) counseling for anyone under 18 — even when the client requests it. It passed 94-4 in the House. The legislation now heads to the Senate.

Joseph Backholm, executive director of the Family Policy Institute of Washington (FPIW), said it was no surprise the bill passed the Democrat-controlled House. The margin by which it passed, though, came as a “shock.”

“It got a lot of support from House Republicans in a surprising way,” Backhom told CitizenLink. “And I think they were just afraid of being characterized in their upcoming elections this fall as people who would support shock treatment and ice baths if they opposed this kind of a bill.”

Supporters of HB 2451 told such stories to paint a dark picture of such therapy.

“While that kind of aversive therapy is broadly condemned, there is little-to-no evidence that such therapy is done commonly if at all,” he explained. “The Washington State Department of Health said they have received no complaints about therapists performing coercive sexual orientation change therapy of any kind — much less ice baths and shock therapy — against the will of a client.”

For those who want to change, SOCE therapy can work.

David Pickup, a licensed therapist in Glendale, Calif., talked to CitizenLink — in an earlier interview — about the success he’s witnessed. He sought SOCE counseling many years ago. It worked for him, and it’s worked for several of his clients.

“For every client that I’ve seen who is motivated and who really does want to change and who doesn’t get discouraged — who follows through and doesn’t give up, there has been a significant and spontaneous lessening or dissipation of homosexual attraction,” he said.

Gov. Jerry Brown signed California’s law two years ago. Pickup filed suit shortly after. A federal appeals court upheld the ban last month. The case has been appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Following California’s lead, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie signed a similar bill this past summer. Liberty Counsel is challenging the law.

“It’s really important that people contact their legislators,” Backholm said. “The rights of people to get counseling in a way that is consistent with their faith, and the rights of people to receive counseling that they want for themselves, are very much at stake.”

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Holy poo poo it was a bad day for bigots
http://www.buzzfeed.com/tonymerevick/lgbt-discrimination-bills-fail

quote:


Proposed legislation that would allow discrimination against LGBT people based on religious beliefs failed or faced major setbacks in four separate states Tuesday, dealing a significant blow to what some have seen as a new front for LGBT rights opponents.

“[Tuesday was] a very important rebuffing of the latest anti-gay and anti-choice tactics, but I wouldn’t say that we’re out of the woods yet,” said Evan Wolfson, president and founder of Freedom to Marry. “Our opponents have lost the argument about gay people, they’ve lost the argument about marriage and all they have left is distractions, diversions, and desperate attempts to carve out the license to discriminate as they have tried in every other civil rights chapter in our nation’s history.”

Lawmakers in Idaho, Kansas, South Dakota, and Tennessee either voted down, blocked, or backtracked on legislation in the states that would have allowed individuals, religious organizations, businesses, and, in the case of Kansas, government employees to discriminate against LGBT people in the form of denying services and other recognition based on religious beliefs.

LGBT and civil rights advocates say that while the battle over these issues is far from over, Tuesday’s developments are encouraging and could send signals to other states contemplating similar measures.

“This is an incredible development and very encouraging,” said Eunice Rho, advocacy and policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union. “People across the country are seeing discrimination is just wrong, plain and simple, no matter how they try to justify it with these bills.”

The bills come in the wake of the growing marriage equality movement in the United States, where marriage is legal for same-sex couples in 17 states and the District of Columbia, and where federal courts have struck down marriage bans in Oklahoma, Utah, and Virginia in recent months.

Although Idaho, Kansas, South Dakota, and Tennessee do not allow marriage for same-sex couples, lawmakers backing the bills say the proposals are preemptive measures to protect businesses with religious beliefs should same-sex couples be allowed to marry there someday, citing cases where businesses were sued for denying services to same-sex couples.

“Just in the last week and a half, we’ve seen liberal, activist judges overrule the will of the people in our neighboring states, Kentucky and Virginia, by overturning their constitutional amendments defining marriage as between a man and a woman,” said Sen. Mike Bell, sponsor of the Tennessee bill. “And it’s shame, it’s a shame that we’re here discussing the protections of business owners’ rights in this regards. Because of liberal court judges across the country, we must stand prepared.”

Moments later, Bell pulled the bill from the state’s Senate Judiciary Committee after concluding with legal experts that the state’s law already “protects our business owners from the type of lawsuit harassment we’ve seen in other states.”

But opponents of these bills say they are “trojan horses” and would ultimately undermine nondiscrimination and human rights laws at municipal and state levels. They are “a dangerous solution to a nonproblem,” Wolfson said.


The proposal in Kansas, House Bill 2453, is particularly egregious, opponents of the bill say, because it would have allowed government employees to turn away people if serving them violated their religious beliefs. Specifically, the bill aims to bar anti-discrimination lawsuits and government sanctions against private and public employees, groups, and businesses for refusing services, goods, accommodations, or employment benefits to same-sex couples.

The bill “basically incites discrimination in every aspect of someone’s life,” Rho said. “[Proponents] try to claim it was limited to wedding-related services, but I would direct them to the bill’s language and ask them how that is because the language is so broad.”

Kansas Sen. Jeff King said Tuesday the legislation won’t pass in the Senate this session after sailing through the House in a 72-49 vote last week. However, “nothing ever stays dead in this capitol,” Thomas Witt, executive director at Kansas Equality, told BuzzFeed.

“That particular [bill] number is dead, but again, that doesn’t mean that the subject matter stays dead,” he said. “It can come right back in a different form and that happens here in regularity. One of my sources called me and said that there are members of the House leadership team looking to see if they have enough votes to send something to the Senate again.”

But, he said, “Senate leadership doesn’t want anything to do with this, and I’m hoping their position is persuasive to the rest of the legislature” — though he added that what happens next on the issue “is anyone’s guess.”

In South Dakota, a Senate committee voted 5-2 on Tuesday to end consideration of a similar bill there for this session. The committee voted to defer the bill, Senate Bill 128, to the 41st day of the legislature’s 40-day session, effectively killing the bill. It would have allowed people and businesses to turn away lesbian, gay, and bisexual people, according to the bill’s text, which reads, “No person or entity may bring suit against another person for expressing their religious beliefs on the subject of sexual orientation.”

Senators listened to extensive and, at times, heated testimony before Tuesday’s vote. Republican Sen. Jeff Monroe defended the bill, saying its purpose is “for protecting against those who purposely choose an entity with whom they are unfamiliar, have no intention of actually ever doing business with, and bringing suit against them based on accusations protected by the Constitution.”

Sen. Mark Kirkeby, another Republican, rejected that argument, saying, “I don’t think this is about protection. Senate Bill 128 — it’s a mean, nasty, hateful, vindictive bill. It just is. I cannot sugarcoat that.”

In Idaho, a bill that would have expanded religious protections faced a major setback when its sponsor, Rep. Lynn Luke, announced he would pull the bill from consideration before the full House and return it to committee after public outcry over concerns it would lead to discrimination.

“The intent of the bill was to provide a shield to protect the free exercise of religion under the First Amendment in light of the variety of increasing government mandates,” Luker said in a statement to The Spokesman-Review on Tuesday. “However, many misinterpreted the intent to be a sword for discrimination. I respect the concerns that I heard and therefore want to find the right language to balance those concerns.”

The House voted unanimously Wednesday to support Luker’s move to put the bill back in committee. The measure will likely not come up again this session, Luker said, according to the paper.

And while advocates at the ACLU and Freedom to Marry welcome the action this week, they remained cautious — noting, for example, that a similar proposal is still pending in Arizona.

“Obviously, the legislative sessions are not over yet,” Rho said. “We’re not going to say victory just yet — I think it would be premature. We are very optimistic because the public’s response opposing these bills. We are keeping very vigilant eyes on how they will slice and dice this moving forward to chip away at LGBT peoples’ rights.”

Mr Ice Cream Glove fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Feb 19, 2014

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

A huge loss for transphobia

quote:

SAN FRANCISCO – referendum to overturn a California law that gives transgender students protections including the right to use the public school restrooms of their choice will not appear on the November ballot after its backers failed to gather enough voter signatures to qualify the measure, the secretary of state said Monday.

The law's opponents were led by a coalition of religious conservative groups who said it violates the privacy of youngsters who may be uncomfortable sharing facilities with classmates of the opposite biological sex. They needed at least 504,760 signatures to force a public vote on the statute approved by the California Legislature and signed by Gov. Jerry Brown last year. They submitted 619,381, but county election officers found just 487,484 of them to be valid.

If the referendum had made the ballot, the law would have been put on hold until after the election as its supporters and opponents mounted a campaign that promised to be as bitterly fought as the one over Proposition 8, the 2008 constitutional amendment that banned same-sex marriage in California until last year.

Kevin Snider, a lawyer with the Pacific Justice Institute who represents the Privacy for All Students coalition, said he and other conservative attorneys plan to challenge the secretary of state's determination by reviewing the invalidated signatures and going to court to try to get them added to the final tally.

"The secretary of state has had the inclination to disenfranchise voters, and we won't sit still and take their word for it," Snider said before the final count was announced.


The law that is the subject of the repeal attempt took effect Jan. 1. It guarantees students in grades K-12 the right to use the school facilities and to participate in the sex-segregated activities that correspond with their expressed genders instead of their school records.

Some school districts around California, as well as the education departments in Massachusetts and Connecticut, have implemented similar policies by regulation. But California is the first state to detail the rights of transgender students in schools by statute.

Although the law's opponents have focused on potential abuses and awkward encounters in bathrooms and locker rooms, schools also evaluated what it means for yearbook photo dress codes, sleeping arrangements for overnight field trips, and activities such as choirs and recreational sports where girls and boys are often separated.

The California Interscholastic Federation, which governs competitive high school sports, adopted a detailed process in 2012 that students must follow if they want to play on a team that is not consistent with their gender at birth.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...itics+-+Text%29

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007


I believe it will get vetoed, Brewer may be ultra conservative but when you have GOP establishment coming out against it I feel somewhat hopeful.

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

I had not known something was going down in FL

quote:

MIAMI, Florida – On behalf of a diverse coalition of citizen groups crossing racial, political, and religious lines, Liberty Counsel today filed a Motion to Intervene in Pareto v. Ruvin, the lawsuit initiated by homosexual activists seeking to declare Florida’s marriage laws unconstitutional.

In 2008, 62 percent of Floridians voted to pass Amendment 2, amending their state constitution to reaffirm marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Mathew and Anita Staver, Liberty Counsel’s Chairman and President, respectively, drafted Amendment 2 and successfully defended it against pre-election legal challenges, ultimately winning unanimous approval (7-0) by the Florida Supreme Court. Amendment 2 was the first constitutional amendment to clear the heightened 60% threshold for voter approval, thanks to the largest grassroots effort on any ballot issue in Florida’s history.

Having lost in the marketplace of ideas and having failed to convince the public to adopt their radical version of "marriage," homosexual activists, led by the National Center for Lesbian Rights and Equality Florida, have now filed suit, asking Miami judge Sarah Zabel to throw out the votes of 8 million Floridians and to judicially impose homosexual marriage upon all Floridians.

Liberty Counsel represents three umbrella civil rights organizations which are seeking to intervene to protect both marriage and the voting rights of all Floridians. FLORIDA FAMILY ACTION is a cultural action organization with thousands of members across the state, devoted to preserving and protecting the institution of marriage. PEOPLE UNITED TO LEAD THE STRUGGLE FOR EQUALITY is a civil rights umbrella organization consisting of 35 civic groups and representing thousands of African-Americans and other minorities. FLORIDA DEMOCRATIC LEAGUE is one of the leading Hispanic-led human rights organizations in Florida, with thousands of members throughout the state, all of which are registered Democrats. Each of these organizations was instrumental to the passage of Amendment 2, and all are uniting to defend natural, man-woman marriage and the right of every Floridian to have his or her vote counted.

"Marriage is a foundational societal institution that transcends racial, political, and religious lines," said Mathew Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. "This lawsuit threatens to disenfranchise millions of Floridians who voted to affirm natural marriage and to supplant the clearly expressed will of a supermajority of Florida’s voters with the radical vision of homosexual activists who cannot win at the ballot box," added Horatio Mihet, Liberty Counsel’s Senior Litigation Counsel. "We are committed to provide a vigorous defense for marriage and voting rights," concluded both.

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

If I read correctly, there are 25 other states with court cases like Texas and OK so I am sure we will see even more victories.

Also reading your post ukalale made my day!

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

The tears

quote:

Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) disagrees with a federal judge's ruling that the state's ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional.

"Texans spoke loud and clear by overwhelmingly voting to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman in our Constitution, and it is not the role of the federal government to overturn the will of our citizens," Perry said.


Perry shared his stance in a statement Wednesday afternoon after U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia ruled the state's ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional. Garcia also issued a stay on the ruling so the ban will remain in place for now.

"The 10th Amendment guarantees Texas voters the freedom to make these decisions, and this is yet another attempt to achieve via the courts what couldn’t be achieved at the ballot box. We will continue to fight for the rights of Texans to self-determine the laws of our state."

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Brewer is speaking at 7:45 est

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Vetoed!!!!

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

CNN has Ted Hagard on pro equality side and some guy from Family Researh Council

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Here is the emergency stay they are trying to submit :lol:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dh8ihqn0swu8em5/DeBoer%20-%20Emergency%20Motion%20to%20Stay%20-%20Sixth.pdf?n=63433056

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Is it possible that the appeals that have been submitted to the US Supreme Court could backfire and get gay marriage legalized in all 50 states?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

Wow




quote:

UPDATE: The owner has responded to a JMG reader. From the comments of this post, this is his message: "We recently posted five 3" stickers on the front entrance to our shop. Two of these stickers are negative and prohibitive in there message. We will not serve people that are foul-mouthed, nor will we serve people that flaunt their homosexual lifestyle in our place of business and/or request us to produce promotional products that do so. Matthew Lombard, Owner."

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2014/04/kentucky-print-shop-no-gays-wanted.html?m=1

  • Locked thread