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

Skip to comments.

Utah’s Gay Marriage Ban Is Ruled Unconstitutional
NYT ^ | 12/20/13

Posted on 12/20/2013 2:03:01 PM PST by Oliviaforever

SALT LAKE CITY — A federal judge on Friday struck down Utah’s same-sex marriage ban, saying it was unconstitutional.

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


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; US: Utah
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda; lds; mormon; mormonism; utah
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-90 next last

1 posted on 12/20/2013 2:03:01 PM PST by Oliviaforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

One a day? Wow! New Mexico was yesterday!


2 posted on 12/20/2013 2:04:18 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (A courageous man finds a way, an ordinary man finds an excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

So the States don’t have the right to define marriage


3 posted on 12/20/2013 2:04:25 PM PST by A_Former_Democrat (Obamacare: We told you so)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

And the anarchy continues.


4 posted on 12/20/2013 2:05:02 PM PST by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A_Former_Democrat

V


5 posted on 12/20/2013 2:05:55 PM PST by VRW Conspirator ( 2+2 = V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
One a day? Wow! New Mexico was yesterday!

And polygamy was earlier in the week.

Next week it will be either pedophilia or bestiality.

6 posted on 12/20/2013 2:06:02 PM PST by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

Do it anyway.


7 posted on 12/20/2013 2:06:32 PM PST by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

The left is determined to destroy this country.


8 posted on 12/20/2013 2:08:13 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

Are mixed doubles tennis matches unconstitutional too?

And men’s and women’s restrooms and locker rooms certainly must be unconstitutional. It’s a form of Jim Crow-like segregation.

I guess it’s also unconstitutional to deny men fertility drugs. Since the law cannot recognize any differences between the sexes, they must be given an equal shot at getting pregnant too.


9 posted on 12/20/2013 2:08:47 PM PST by JediJones (The #1 Must-see Filibuster of the Year: TEXAS TED AND THE CONSERVATIVE CRUZ-ADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

That 14th Amendment is certainly handy for activist judges.


10 posted on 12/20/2013 2:08:51 PM PST by Bratch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

expect this federal judge stuff to get worse as Barry S. packs the courts


11 posted on 12/20/2013 2:08:59 PM PST by telstar12.5 (...always bring gunships to a gun fight...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

I still haven’t found in the U.S. Constitution or the Bill of Rights where it says that two men can marry each other. Haven’t found jack about a woman’s choice to murder her baby either. Must be some of those goofyass “progressive” things the commie libs are always coming up with. The Constitution DOES NOT ADDRESS homosexual marriage.


12 posted on 12/20/2013 2:09:11 PM PST by FlingWingFlyer (Merry Christmas to all my fellow Americans. "Whatever" to everybody else!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A_Former_Democrat

ask the judge to cite the part of the Constitution where they found this

It’s not there


13 posted on 12/20/2013 2:09:16 PM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever
Obama activist judge.

Pending appeal to the 10th circuit….so the matter isn’t decided yet.

Though it seems that the leftist wacko judges are intentionally sticking it to conservative Christians right before Christmas.

14 posted on 12/20/2013 2:10:15 PM PST by LdSentinal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

It is time for the House to start bringing impeachment proceedings against these out of control federal judges and have them explain themselves before the American People. I bet a lot of this foolishness will soon get stopped.


15 posted on 12/20/2013 2:10:16 PM PST by Patriot365
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A_Former_Democrat

States have no rights, thus sayeth the 0.


16 posted on 12/20/2013 2:10:20 PM PST by mykroar (We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again. - Nathanael Greene)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

Justice Scalia laid it out in his dissent on DOMA.

The Supreme Court majority of five can’t wait to give us a Roe v. Wade to make gay marriage “the law of the land”.

It is inevitable in the next several years.


17 posted on 12/20/2013 2:10:30 PM PST by Nextrush (AFFORDABLE CARE ACT=HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY BAILOUT ACT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JediJones

Expect it all.


18 posted on 12/20/2013 2:10:37 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

If Justice Anthony Kennedy had a soul, he would realize the monster he has unleashed with his DOMA decision.


19 posted on 12/20/2013 2:11:17 PM PST by LdSentinal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JediJones

I think it would hilarious if some self-described “other gendered” guy decided to play on a “mixed doubles” team against a “normal” team. It would be hilarious to see how they would try to fix that without resorting to non-PC “stereotyping”.


20 posted on 12/20/2013 2:11:35 PM PST by mrsmel (One Who Can See)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

The polygamy ruling was just restricting Utah from prosecuting people for cohabitating, it did not keep them from prosecuting bigamy. It was based on and brought by the people on that Sister Wives show, IIRC. They were being charged even though he’s only legally married to one of those ladies. The judge felt that Utah’s law went too far.


21 posted on 12/20/2013 2:12:12 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (A courageous man finds a way, an ordinary man finds an excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

No mention of an appeal. Typical NY Slimes selective “reporting.”


22 posted on 12/20/2013 2:12:43 PM PST by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal
If Justice Anthony Kennedy had a soul, he would realize the monster he has unleashed with his DOMA decision.

He handed the vicious sodomites a huge club with which to beat normal Americans.

23 posted on 12/20/2013 2:13:49 PM PST by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

utter B/S, soon it will be all states with fed judges choosing to ignore the 10th


24 posted on 12/20/2013 2:13:56 PM PST by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: A_Former_Democrat

So polygamy has to be legal, marrying your sibling must be legal. Where will it end?


25 posted on 12/20/2013 2:14:30 PM PST by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fwdude
And the anarchy continues.

Anarchy is defined as the complete absence of government.

Personally, I'm straight; but I know some homosexuals and I think they have rights beyond your personal imagination.

26 posted on 12/20/2013 2:15:08 PM PST by OldNavyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
The polygamy ruling was just restricting Utah from prosecuting people for cohabitating, it did not keep them from prosecuting bigamy. It was based on and brought by the people on that Sister Wives show, IIRC. They were being charged even though he’s only legally married to one of those ladies. The judge felt that Utah’s law went too far.

BUT, it will be construed to mean that they MUST be recognized, just as Lawrence v. Texas, made sodomy "legal" nationwide, was cited extensively to force counterfeit marriage on multiple states.

Yes, this is the Lawrence of the polygamists.

27 posted on 12/20/2013 2:16:25 PM PST by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

Phil Robertson for president!


28 posted on 12/20/2013 2:16:31 PM PST by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

here is a thought , if those homosexuals want their sham then they can move to places like MA and stay there but we all know this is not about marriage , this is about a bigger homo agenda and closing down the first and tenth amendments.

The amount of homosexuals I;ve seen and know of who have moved out of places like CA and MA and then come south telling us all how they are married is stunning.

They are not married here and they should go back north or the west coast if they want their perverted sham


29 posted on 12/20/2013 2:16:57 PM PST by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

Hey judge - I declare your ruling unconstitutional. Two can play this game.


30 posted on 12/20/2013 2:17:41 PM PST by lesko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldNavyVet

You apparently have no idea what “rights” are, Leftist.


31 posted on 12/20/2013 2:17:46 PM PST by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

weird that because I searched and searched and found nothing that they have a right to marry


32 posted on 12/20/2013 2:17:51 PM PST by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

It really would work better if Federal judges at least read the Constitution once.


33 posted on 12/20/2013 2:18:08 PM PST by Ingtar (The NSA - "We're the only part of government who actually listens to the people.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

Loving v. Virginia is the way that SCOTUS will ultimately rule on same-sex marriage.

It’ll be almost the same decision verbatim, with necessary changes re: same-sex couples/interracial couples.

I figure in less than five years. Maybe as few as two.


34 posted on 12/20/2013 2:19:02 PM PST by AnAmericanAbroad (It's all bread and circuses for the future prey of the Morlocks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: OldNavyVet
Personally, I'm straight; but I know some homosexuals and I think they have rights beyond your personal imagination.

****************************

What do you mean?

35 posted on 12/20/2013 2:20:19 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: trisham

And don’t forget to thank Donald Trump for letting transsexuals in beauty pageants.

And of course it’s unconstitutional to not let boys be voted the prom queen or girls the prom king now.

Hollywood will probably repeal best actor and actress Oscars soon and make those awards unisex.


36 posted on 12/20/2013 2:21:13 PM PST by JediJones (The #1 Must-see Filibuster of the Year: TEXAS TED AND THE CONSERVATIVE CRUZ-ADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012
Where will it end?

Societal collapse, ruin and domination by stonger nations...probably not if our lifetimes but eventually. The trend is still reversable, but every passing day makes a reversal less likely.

37 posted on 12/20/2013 2:21:39 PM PST by matt1234 (Hitler blamed the Jews. Obama blames the Tea Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

It’s only un-Constitutional if you accept that FedGov has ANY authority to legislate in this subject.

Hint: They DON’T.

This is a State’s Rights issue.


38 posted on 12/20/2013 2:22:59 PM PST by PubliusMM (RKBA; a matter of fact, not opinion. 01-20-2016; I pray we make it that long.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever
Claire Wolfe, is it time yet?

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

39 posted on 12/20/2013 2:23:38 PM PST by wku man (It's almost deer season, got your DEERGOGGLES on yet? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jexrnFq2fXY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: matt1234

A very tiny segment of society can ruin a culture and a nation in the age of mass communications.


40 posted on 12/20/2013 2:23:40 PM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanAbroad

Anti-miscegenation laws are bad policy, but there really isn’t anything in the constitution that forces states to grant legal recognition to particular marriages. The real problem were the laws that criminalized sex and cohabitation of mixed race couples.


41 posted on 12/20/2013 2:24:23 PM PST by LdSentinal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanAbroad

Then Loving needs to be overturned. It was a faulty decision as well. It didn’t represent the will of the people.


42 posted on 12/20/2013 2:24:43 PM PST by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal

Anti-miscegenation laws are bad policy, but there really isn’t anything in the constitution that forces states to grant legal recognition to particular marriages. The real problem were the laws that criminalized sex and cohabitation of mixed race couples.
________________________________

Fair enough. I just figure that when SCOTUS finally rules on it, I think it’ll essentially be a repeat of Loving v. Virginia.

Of course, that’s just my view, and trying to predict the SCOTUS? Heck, I’d have better luck predicting a Megamillions jackpot.


43 posted on 12/20/2013 2:26:50 PM PST by AnAmericanAbroad (It's all bread and circuses for the future prey of the Morlocks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: wku man

As wishy-washy as the Mormons have become on this issue, I don’t really expect them to set off the necessary civil war. It will take some screwball black-robed tyrant telling Texas that it must sodomize marriage before something substantial is likely initiated.


44 posted on 12/20/2013 2:28:10 PM PST by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: central_va
A very tiny segment of society can ruin a culture and a nation in the age of mass communications.

True. Homosexual marriage is just one of many facets in the general moral rot of this country. It is the moral rot that will destroy us (if we are to be destroyed), not homosexual marriage alone.

45 posted on 12/20/2013 2:28:40 PM PST by matt1234 (Hitler blamed the Jews. Obama blames the Tea Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: PubliusMM

States Rights? The purpose of the States is to help divide up the work of administering the Federal Government’s edicts, plus the State names help the NSA keep track of what they’re spying on.

Unfortunately while we’re worried about State’s rights the Obama administration is working hard on yielding our national sovereignty to the United Nations through various treaties.


46 posted on 12/20/2013 2:29:53 PM PST by Junk Silver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: matt1234

during the cold war the communists knew this and one only has to read their 1963 in how to destroy the USA


47 posted on 12/20/2013 2:30:10 PM PST by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever
Weren't the homos just telling us in their Windsor case that this was a STATES RIGHTS ISSUE?
48 posted on 12/20/2013 2:32:39 PM PST by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VRW Conspirator

Yes

as in tagline


49 posted on 12/20/2013 2:32:54 PM PST by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: A_Former_Democrat
The states and by extension the Citizens are subject to the whims of a perverted unelected Federal Judiciary.

Thats a direct result of the South losing the Civil war.

50 posted on 12/20/2013 2:36:07 PM PST by Rome2000 (THE WASHINGTONIANS AND UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE ARE THE ENEMY -ROTATE THE CAPITAL AMONGST THE STATES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-90 next last

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