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 ...
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
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.
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.
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.
> 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.
As of 2013, what is the status of that bill?
>>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.
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.
I feel ya, man. Kids need to stay kids for as long as possible. They'll be in the real world soon enough.
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.
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.
They talk about that stuff in the south, too. Hate to tell you. If she’s ever ridden the school bus, she knows.
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?
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.
Obamanation Counterculture File.
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!
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.
>>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.
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.
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.