Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mass AG asking court to throw out marriage law
http://bostonherald.com ^ | 03/27/2013 | Associated Press

Posted on 03/27/2013 6:41:39 AM PDT by massmike

Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley plans to be at the U.S. Supreme Court for arguments on the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

Massachusetts in 2009 was the first state to challenge DOMA, saying the law discriminated against the thousands of couples that had married since the state legalized gay marriage.

(Excerpt) Read more at bostonherald.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Massachusetts
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda; romneyagenda; romneymarriage; romneyvsclerks; sourcetitlenoturl

1 posted on 03/27/2013 6:41:39 AM PDT by massmike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: massmike

Massachusetts in 2009 was the first state to challenge DOMA, saying the law discriminated against the thousands of couples that had married since the state legalized gay marriage.


Massachusetts NEVER legalized gay “marriage”!

TUESDAY, MARCH 16, 2010
Confirmed Today: Gay Marriage STILL Not Legal in Mass.!
For years now — since 2005 — the homosexual lobby has filed and refiled its bill to legalize “gay marriage” in Massachusetts. They know that the law as it now stands refers to “man/woman”, “husband/wife” relationships as marriage. Today, the Judiciary Committee once again sent the bill to “study” — meaning, they killed it. But the very existence of this bill over the years confirms that we are correct that “gay marriage” has never been made legal in Massachusetts.

SHELVED TODAY:
House Bill 1708
AN ACT TO PROTECT MASSACHUSETTS FAMILIES THROUGH EQUAL ACCESS TO CIVIL
MARRIAGE
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority
of the same, as follows:
SECTION 1. Chapter 207 is hereby amended by adding the
following new section:—
Section 37A. Any person who otherwise meets the eligibility requirements of this chapter may
marry any other eligible person regardless of gender.

Why would the Judiciary Committee continue to bury this bill? We believe they don’t want to draw attention to the fact that all the “gay marriages” since 2004 are fraudulent.

http://massresistance.blogspot.com/2010/03/confirmed-today-gay-marriage-still-not.html


2 posted on 03/27/2013 6:44:14 AM PDT by massmike (At least no one is wearing a "Ron Paul - 2016" tee shirt........yet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

You guus really want to “defend” marriage? Get the government out of it. The feds have no constitutional authority in it anyway. It amazes me that a so many people are so eager to have big brother endorse, sanction and subsidize their marriages, children, schools and communities but get all upset when big brother attaches his strings to all those favors he does for them.


3 posted on 03/27/2013 6:48:53 AM PDT by Orangedog (An optimist is someone who tells you to 'cheer up' when things are going his way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

You know what pisses me off? I have a 8 year old daughter.

I have to shut the damn radio off every time this discussion of gay marriage comes up because I don’t want to talk to her about sex until I’m ready to talk to her about it.

Damn this society.


4 posted on 03/27/2013 6:51:50 AM PDT by struggle (http://killthegovernment.wordpress.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog

Inheritance and tax deductions ~ simply eliminate the federal death tax as well as the income tax and that’s most of your problem right there.


5 posted on 03/27/2013 6:53:11 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: struggle

> I have a 8 year old daughter.
>
> I have to shut the damn radio off every time this
> discussion of gay marriage comes up because I don’t want to
> talk to her about sex until I’m ready to talk to her about it.

If she’s in a public school, she already knows about sex, homosex, transgender, the whole gamut.


6 posted on 03/27/2013 6:53:48 AM PDT by Westbrook (Children do not divide your love, they multiply it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: massmike

As of 2013, what is the status of that bill?


7 posted on 03/27/2013 6:55:46 AM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook

>>If she’s in a public school, she already knows about sex, homosex, transgender, the whole gamut.

No, she goes to a public school in the South, where they still teach math and English. It’s just frustrating because our society is so saturated with sex kids have no time to be kids.


8 posted on 03/27/2013 6:55:50 AM PDT by struggle (http://killthegovernment.wordpress.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog

If you go back to the history books....it’s an odd way that the US gov’t got into marriage.

The whole ideal of a marriage license was foreign until the topic came up in Penn....where a husband would die, and there would be a debate over joint property. The husband’s relatives would inject that they now owned a farm....instead of the wife. So they developed a license as the state method of tracking marriages and then proving the case quickly in a court setting. No license....then you got into a long-winded ownership debate.

The second episode occurred down in North and South Carolina, where some guys married, then jumped up and ran off to another county to marry again (no divorce). So they felt that a license would bond the situation and make legal recourse in a courtroom easier. The license became the solution.

So we come to the early 1900s....where income taxes walked into our lives, and again...we’ve built various devices to help the married folks....over single folks.

I pretty much agree...marriage is nothing that the gov’t should get into. If you want a civil union...it should be a two-page form at your county office and you just fill it out....swear in front of a judge, and you are a civil union. As for marriage? It ought be only a church service, and have no legal standing beyond that. If a gay couple can find a church to do a sanctioned church ceremony....fine, otherwise, it’s not the public’s problem.

I think we are pretty much wasting a fair amount of time on this topic.


9 posted on 03/27/2013 6:57:19 AM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: struggle
You know what pisses me off? I have a 8 year old daughter. I have to shut the damn radio off every time this discussion of gay marriage comes up because I don’t want to talk to her about sex until I’m ready to talk to her about it.

I feel ya, man. Kids need to stay kids for as long as possible. They'll be in the real world soon enough.

10 posted on 03/27/2013 7:02:27 AM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps

CHAPTER 207 MARRIAGE

http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartII/TitleIII/Chapter207

http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartII/TitleIII/Chapter209

Marriage is still listed as husband and wife.


11 posted on 03/27/2013 7:05:12 AM PDT by massmike (At least no one is wearing a "Ron Paul - 2016" tee shirt........yet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

I was married once. I’m almost certain the the biggest threat to my marriage wasn’t the two gals in the next apartmnet complex who stopped driving stick and decided to play house together. No, I’m pretty sure it more to do with my (now) ex wife knowing that if she paid a lawyer $1000 she could use the government to take my kid, most of my stuff and a good chunck of my future earnings. That 50% divorce rate isn’t because government spent decades making marriage stronger with all the favors it’s done for married people with single people’s money.


12 posted on 03/27/2013 7:06:49 AM PDT by Orangedog (An optimist is someone who tells you to 'cheer up' when things are going his way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: struggle

They talk about that stuff in the south, too. Hate to tell you. If she’s ever ridden the school bus, she knows.


13 posted on 03/27/2013 7:07:49 AM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog

I agree. Having handed over marriage for the states to administer, having invited the Feds in to give tax breaks and benefits, are we now surprised when the state thinks it has the power to define its institution any way it wants?


14 posted on 03/27/2013 7:26:44 AM PDT by highball ("I never should have switched from scotch to martinis." -- the last words of Humphrey Bogart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice

Gays are now suing churches for not providing the ceremony so it kills that -

Church is not so private - Marriage requires at least one witness - which makes it a “public event.”

Not so easy to separate.


15 posted on 03/27/2013 7:46:25 AM PDT by edcoil (If the man was accused of leadership, there would not be enough evidence to convict him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Obamanation Counterculture File.


16 posted on 03/27/2013 8:39:16 AM PDT by Graewoulf (Traitor John Roberts' Commune-Style Obama'care' violates U.S. Constitution AND Anti-Trust Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog
This only began to become an issue for the American people when libs/feminazis demanded "no fault" divorce.

After that, divorce began to be such an issue with more than one out of every two marriages ending in divorce or so statistics began claiming (not 50% of all marriages but only newer marriages), then younger adults of the marrying age said, "Why bother to get married if I'm only going to get divorced in a few years anyway?" Actually, that was mostly the men saying that as most women still prefer marriage over shacking up.

Various churches began overlooking "couples and families" within their congregations who actually weren't legally married but preferred not to notice nor to require couples to be legally wed and others performed "marriages" to couples who had lived together and even produced children, so marriage has been basically devalued as an institution by those of us who claim it should be only between a man and a woman (used to say, for a lifetime, but no longer.)

The first day we, as a society devalued marriage as an institution we claimed to revere, this was what the result would someday become.

That "someday" is now here.

You can't shake your fist at God and not have Him notice. He will give you over to your desires so that you can live what you have demanded of Him!

17 posted on 03/27/2013 8:48:57 AM PDT by zerosix (Native sunflower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: massmike

DOMA Protects the other States. It has nothing to do Gay Married Couples in MA. If they want to live somewhere else, they abide by the Laws of that State. Freedom of Choice...

Another Fascist who has no concept of States Rights and the Constitution of the United States.


18 posted on 03/27/2013 9:09:22 AM PDT by Kickass Conservative (Compliance with Tyranny is Treason...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Black Agnes

>>They talk about that stuff in the south, too. Hate to tell you. If she’s ever ridden the school bus, she knows.

That’s why she doesn’t.


19 posted on 03/27/2013 9:12:07 AM PDT by struggle (http://killthegovernment.wordpress.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: struggle

Do any of her classmates have parents who let them watch Glee? Or any current entertainment?

Does she stand in the lunch line with these kids? Outside at recess?

If she goes to school, she knows.

Honey Boo Boo isn’t the only public school kid in the south with an ‘uncle poodle’ who knows what exactly that means. And talks about it to all and sundry.


20 posted on 03/27/2013 9:15:13 AM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: zerosix
This only began to become an issue for the American people when libs/feminazis demanded "no fault" divorce

Bonus points if you can name the first governor to sign no fault divorce into law.

21 posted on 03/27/2013 9:18:35 AM PDT by Orangedog (An optimist is someone who tells you to 'cheer up' when things are going his way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson