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

Skip to comments.

Alabama chief justice tells judges to halt same-sex 'marriages'
WND ^ | 6 Jan 2016 | Bob Unruh

Posted on 01/06/2016 10:55:24 AM PST by amorphous

Chief Justice Roy Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court on Wednesday issued an order that the state’s probate judges, the only ones in the state who are allowed to issue marriage licenses, are to follow the state's Sanctity of Marriage Amendment and the state's Marriage Protection Act until the full state Supreme Court rules on the issue.

In other words, stop granting marriage licenses to same-sex duos, even though that was the intent of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision last summer.

"Until further decision by the Alabama Supreme Court, the existing orders of the Alabama Supreme Court that Alabama probate judges have a ministerial duty not to issue any marriage license contrary to the Alabama Sanctity of Marriage Amendment or the Alabama Marriage Protection Act remain in full force and effect," he said.

The move brings into sharp focus the divide between those who grant to the U.S. Supreme Court the decision-making authority for all issues in the country, and those who subscribe to the Constitution's concept of a limit on the federal government's authority.

Marriage nowhere is mentioned in the Constitution, which provides that all such topics shall be reserved to the states and their people.

The fight over marriage had developed in Alabama before the Obergefell decision in Washington. A federal judge had ordered the creation of same-sex "marriage," but the state Supreme Court put on the brakes, telling probate judges to follow the state constitution and law.

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


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; US: Alabama
KEYWORDS: 10commandments; 201601; alabama; gay; gaykkk; homosexualagenda; lesbian; lgbt; libertarians; marriage; medicalmarijuana; obergefell; roymoore; samesex; tencommandments
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last
To: DiogenesLamp
How Congress Dealt With The Polygamy Issue
21 posted on 01/06/2016 11:27:36 AM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: HLPhat

Ha! Took me a minute, but I got it. I’m a bit slow this time of the week! :)


22 posted on 01/06/2016 11:27:36 AM PST by gop4lyf (Gay marriage is neither)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero
Let's bring this issue and the 2nd amendment to a head. As our brethren in Oregon are doing re: government land grabs....we must stick together.

Well stated. The timing seems to suck, but we don't always get to pick the circumstances or the time - sometimes our only choice is to fight or submit. And sometimes, in foresight, the timing was perfect - it just didn't seem like it at the time. And those times are when we need faith in the Almighty.

23 posted on 01/06/2016 11:28:06 AM PST by amorphous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: alancarp

This is something that struck me with the case in Kentucky. If the supreme court issues an edict, its not some clerk’s job to manufacturer a new law...so why shouldn’t she follow the existing law? People seem all to willing to let the supremes legislate.


24 posted on 01/06/2016 11:28:27 AM PST by lacrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Congress passed anti bigamy laws. Read my link.


25 posted on 01/06/2016 11:28:30 AM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: The Ghost of FReepers Past

May our next President appoint a judge such as this to the Supreme Court.


26 posted on 01/06/2016 11:29:21 AM PST by so_real ( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: so_real

Wouldn’t that be wonderful?


27 posted on 01/06/2016 11:30:31 AM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: The Ghost of FReepers Past
How Congress Dealt With The Polygamy Issue

I'm not seeing how this contradicts what I said.

28 posted on 01/06/2016 11:32:10 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: The Ghost of FReepers Past
Congress passed anti bigamy laws. Read my link.

They didn't have the ACLU and Liberal judges telling them they couldn't.

29 posted on 01/06/2016 11:33:27 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Exactly!


30 posted on 01/06/2016 11:34:00 AM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik

No State has to issue homo licences. A SCOTUS ruling is ONLY an “opinion”. It is NOT law. The legislative branch has to make it law and the executive branch has to sign it into law. Congress makes laws. Courts render opinions. Opinions are…well…opinions. Judges give their opinions of what they think the law says. A COURT DECISION IS NOT A LAW!! Do you understand that? Roe v Wade is NOT the law of the land. Roe v Wade was an OPINION handed down by judges. Judges and courts do not make laws, but rather merely render opinions. Opinions can change when judges change. The law cannot be changed by a “judge.” If that were the case, our “laws” would be as constantly changing as the “judges” are.

If “judges” ruled that sodomy was illegal in 1986, how did sodomy become “legal” today? Did the law change, or did the “opinions” of the “judges” change?


31 posted on 01/06/2016 11:37:55 AM PST by afchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: amorphous

Marriage has always been a state issue, never a federal one. I’d like to see this work its way through the courts to decide that once and for all. And if at the end the Supreme Court rules against Alabama then the states should drop the whole marriage license thing altogether and let the feds issue them.


32 posted on 01/06/2016 11:43:32 AM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
That’s why SCOTUS recast the issue as one of individual rights protected by the 14th amendment. It gets around the “marriage isn’t an enumerated federal power” issue.

Marriage before God can only be recognized as such when it occurs between a natural man and woman, per commandment of Almighty God. This makes any ruling by the SCOTUS concerning such a Divine matter, well outside its earthly jurisdiction. Our wrongheaded government's glorification of what the Almighty considers an abomination threatens America's very survival.

33 posted on 01/06/2016 11:53:18 AM PST by amorphous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: amorphous
WND also reported just weeks ago when dozens of top legal scholars from the likes of ... Kansas State

Given that Kansas State doesn't have a law school, I'm pretty sure there aren't any top legal scholars there.

34 posted on 01/06/2016 11:54:06 AM PST by JhawkAtty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
That;s why SCOTUS recast the issue as one of individual rights protected by the 14th amendment. It gets around the "marriage isn't an enumerated federal power" issue.

Sure. The Constitution is as elastic as they need it to be. Then you got them emanations from penumbras, if they can't find anything to stretch quite far enough.

35 posted on 01/06/2016 11:57:28 AM PST by don-o (I am Kenneth Carlisle - Waco 5/17/15)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JhawkAtty
Given that Kansas State doesn't have a law school, I'm pretty sure there aren't any top legal scholars there.

Hey we're flyover country. Some law school in the state of Kansas. Close enough.

36 posted on 01/06/2016 12:00:51 PM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
Hey we're flyover country. Some law school in the state of Kansas. Close enough.

Could be Washburn or KU.

37 posted on 01/06/2016 12:03:30 PM PST by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg; JhawkAtty
Close enough.

And better water than DC, obviously.

38 posted on 01/06/2016 12:06:53 PM PST by amorphous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: so_real

Roy Moore himself would be a good candidate.


39 posted on 01/06/2016 12:11:34 PM PST by liberalism is suicide (Communism,fascism-no matter how you slice socialism, its still baloney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: WENDLE

God’s Blessings on him


40 posted on 01/06/2016 12:20:15 PM PST by aces (Jesus Saves Not Society)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 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