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

Skip to comments.

Judge rules Virginia’s ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional
WTVR6 ^ | February 13, 2014 | Alix Bryan

Posted on 02/13/2014 8:14:49 PM PST by cutofyourjib

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-107 last
To: MHGinTN
Virginians are getting what they deserve

Not fair to say that. Virginia would still go red every time if it didn't have the cancerous growth of Washington DC spreading its tentacles all over the northern part of our poor state. Imagine if DC was next to YOUR state. :-(

101 posted on 02/15/2014 8:59:28 PM PST by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis

I am quite familiar with politics in sw Virginia since I live in the Tri-Cities. The democrips hold too many seats.


102 posted on 02/15/2014 9:04:01 PM PST by MHGinTN (Being deceived can be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis
Imagine if DC was next to YOUR state. :-(

Try living in Oregon, where most of the population are California imports.

103 posted on 02/16/2014 8:13:33 AM PST by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: cutofyourjib

No. The “Fundamental Transformation” isn’t complete yet. You’ll know when they’re done when you’re breaking your back in a rise paddy or rotting in a gulag.

We’re on the edge of economic, political, and social disaster. This is yet another sign.


104 posted on 02/16/2014 2:01:28 PM PST by Absolutely Nobama (The Doomsday Clock is at 11:59:55......tick-tock, tick-tock, tick-tock.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bk1000
I fail to see the discrimination. To say people should be able to marry whomever they love changes the definition of marriage and is silly.

It was not considered discrimination that one not be permitted to marry a sibling or, in most cases, even a first cousin (of the opposite sex).

So why is a restriction on a Biblically and biologically unsound union considered discrimination?

They remain free to marry, just not under conditions imposed on all. Because those conditions were imposed on all, there is no discrimination, only their desire to act in opposition to the conditions.

As for the whomever they love part, what if that is a pet, a child, a sibling? What kettle of worms do they open with this nonsense? Those ruling this way are sick, twisted, or patently insane.

105 posted on 02/16/2014 6:09:20 PM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Captain Jack Aubrey
But here is the point that I think everyone is missing. Homosexuals have the same right to marry someone of the opposite sex as heterosexuals.

How can this be a “denial” of equal protection?

Bingo!

By the way, the erroneous reasoning by judges on equal protection grounds would and does apply to any activity licensed by the state.

If one prefers to cut hair, the state should not deny cosmetology licenses to those who only have skills to repair automobiles.

The state cannot restrict persons who prefer driving on sidewalks to driving only on paved highways.

The state cannot forbid deer hunting licenses to those who prefer to hunt possums.

And as you point out, homosexuals are in fact NOT treated distinctly from heterosexuals. Homosexuals have identical treatment under the law. The homosexual is forbidden from using his cosmetology license to practice psychiatry and surgery, the homosexual is forbidden from using his squirrel hunting license to hunt muskrats, the homosexual is forbidden to use his driver's license to drive on sidewalks, and the homosexual is forbidden from using a marriage license to marry somebody of the same sex. It is in fact, irrelevant that the license applicant is heterosexual or homosexual.

And, also by the way, the state has NO tests on love when issuing marriage licenses. Love is not a requirement, and it is not tested..... And this is rightly so, for I love my mother, father, daughter, son, neighbor, dog, preacher, teacher, neighbor, and married friend.

And.... Homosexuals have the same contract rights as anybody else. Timmy and Tommy and Tony and Tammy Too can contract to love, cherish, fornicate, and share bank accounts as they desire.

106 posted on 02/19/2014 12:00:19 PM PST by mbarker12474
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: cutofyourjib

These jduges are idiots as well as being un-American.

The plaintiffs in this case have the exact same rights to marry that I do. They can marry one person of the opposite sex that will have them.

They cannot marry their toaster, or their goat, or their mother nor another man. Same limitations I have.


107 posted on 02/19/2014 12:19:21 PM PST by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-107 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