Skip to comments.
Arkansas Judge Overturns Morality
Mountain Journal News ^
| 29 Dec 2004
Posted on 12/29/2004 6:21:54 PM PST by steplock
Arkansas Judge Overturns Morality
Articles / Law & Courts Dec 29, 2004 - 08:02 PM
|
On December 29, 2004. Judge Tim Fox in Little Rock declared that Arkansas Laws based on the morals of the people are "unconstitutional.
Ruling in a case brought by the Arkansas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union - ACLU, Pulaski County Circuit Judge Timothy Fox said the state Child Welfare Agency Review board had overstepped its authority by trying to regulate public morality. Fox threw out the state's ban against foster parenthood by gay couples or by households that include a gay adult.
TIM FOX Division 6 401 West Markham/Room 210 Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 340-8416 FAX # (501) 340-6047
Definition of Law:
A rule or body of rules of conduct based on the MORALS inherent in human nature and essential to or binding upon human society
A Sept. 20, 2004 order by Pulaski County Circuit Judge Tim Fox removed Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader from the ballot.
Fox ruled that the more than 1,000 people who signed petitions to place Nader's name on the ballot did not formally name him as "their" choice for president.
|
This article is from Mountain Journal News http://www.mountainjournalnews.com/
The URL for this story is: http://www.mountainjournalnews.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=522 |
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Arkansas
KEYWORDS: children; homosexual; homosexualagenda; perverts; ruling
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-96 next last
To: steplock
Arkansas Judge Overturns MoralityWoo-hoo! Party at my house! Bring lots of cute women and alcohol!
Comment #62 Removed by Moderator
To: goldstategop
I guess laws prohibiting crime and banning public indecency are also unconstitutional now.
Why? The DHS doesn't make those laws.
63
posted on
01/01/2005 12:35:45 PM PST
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!Ah, but)
To: TheBattman
I personally am growing tired of this troll/Christian baiting homosexual and this thread.
I see this response often, when someone arguing in favor of such mean-spirited and irrational laws is exposed as not having a single logical justification for them. This, followed by an appeal to their religious beliefs, which not everyone in the country shares.
64
posted on
01/01/2005 12:37:28 PM PST
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!Ah, but)
To: Dimensio
If you can't legislate morality, then ALL laws based on it are constitutionally infirm. Like DUH.
65
posted on
01/01/2005 12:37:57 PM PST
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: steplock
Is he federal or state judge?
If he's state and if they elect judges - recall him.
66
posted on
01/01/2005 12:47:00 PM PST
by
Dan from Michigan
("Don't flatter yourself - peewee!" - Tango and Cash)
Comment #67 Removed by Moderator
To: goldstategop
Judge Fox's ruling was based in part on the fact that the DHS was not given the authority to "regulate morality". That means that he found that the department that made the policy exceeded their authority when making it. He did not rule that the state cannot regulate morality, which means that if the law were written by the state, he would not have been able to use "regulating morality" as a basis for his ruling. Of course, facts seem to be uncomfortable when trying to support indefensible positions such as the now overturned regulation, so I'm not surprised to see so many people claiming that the ruling said something that it did not.
68
posted on
01/01/2005 1:00:01 PM PST
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!Ah, but)
To: Dimensio
Then the State Legislature should rewrite the law. I still dislike judges substituting their own views for the general beliefs of society just to placate the pleadings of special interest groups.
69
posted on
01/01/2005 1:02:53 PM PST
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: GatorPaul
For a matter of fact they were all evil self absorbed dangerous sexual deviants.
Somehow I have a feeling that your perception is based more upon what you want to believe about them rather than reality.
Either that, or you ignore every instance that doesn't fit your prejudices, assuming that anyone who isn't a "self absorbed dangerous sexual deviant" isn't a homosexual.
70
posted on
01/01/2005 1:03:22 PM PST
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!Ah, but)
To: goldstategop
Then the State Legislature should rewrite the law.
Actually, the proposal is to give the DHS the authority to regulate morality. An unfortunate, but expected knee-jerk reaction from idiot lawmakers who don't use logic or reason.
I still dislike judges substituting their own views for the general beliefs of society just to placate the pleadings of special interest groups.
So it's okay for a government agency to make policies that overstep their authority? Maybe the FDA should ban pork to appease Muslims?
71
posted on
01/01/2005 1:05:00 PM PST
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!Ah, but)
To: af_vet_1981
Plant a plaque in his courtroom.
72
posted on
01/01/2005 1:28:42 PM PST
by
Old Professer
(When the fear of dying no longer obtains no act is unimaginable.)
To: Dimensio
Hey, go spout your twaddle somewhere else....tell it to the victims of the ped priests praying (excuse me, preying) on innocent victims serving as alter boys.
Tell it to the parents of the child who was sodomized, tortured and ultimately killed by positonal suffocation at the hands of the perps who were "befriending" him. I would not risk having my child in the home of a homosexual. I believe you will find that in Johnson, AR a homosexual father (recently out of the closet) sodomized his own four year old. BTW, the father had AIDS. The mother legally tried to prevent his "father" from having visitation without supervision. The judge said no...I'm sure his wishing now he had done otherwise. The following examples are just a few local from Washington/Benton Co. What else don't we know? And why place the innocent before them to find out?
73
posted on
01/01/2005 2:10:02 PM PST
by
missanne
(Go to work, write letters to the editor!)
Comment #74 Removed by Moderator
To: missanne
Hey, go spout your twaddle somewhere else....tell it to the victims of the ped priests praying (excuse me, preying) on innocent victims serving as alter boys.
How would the Arkansas restriction on foster parents prevent this?
Tell it to the parents of the child who was sodomized, tortured and ultimately killed by positonal suffocation at the hands of the perps who were "befriending" him.
How would the Arkasnas restriction on foster parents prevent this?
I would not risk having my child in the home of a homosexual.
Of course not. You're paranoid and delusional.
I believe you will find that in Johnson, AR a homosexual father (recently out of the closet) sodomized his own four year old. BTW, the father had AIDS.
Got a link for the story? And would it have been acceptable were it a father molesting a four year-old daughter? Do you have any evidence that isn't anecdotal, because I can give you anecdotal in response.
I read a story about a homosexual in Indiana who had adopted three brothers who all had long-term mental problems (as a result of fetal alcohol syndrom, nothing that the adoptive father had done), and was planning on adopting their sister (who also suffered from long-term medical issues) when a man named Earl Kimmerling stepped in, wrote letters to the paper and even solicited the aid of a state Representative and managed to circumvent enough red tape to quickly adopt the girl on his own with his wife, thus splitting up the siblings. I think that Kimmerling is a jerk, to say the very least, but you probably regard him as some kind of hero and probably wish that there were more men like Earl Kimmerling out there.
75
posted on
01/01/2005 4:16:28 PM PST
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!Ah, but)
To: Dimensio; Budge; Travelgirl
More twaddle!!! I don't need to post a link. I'm a law enforcement officer and had first hand knowledge of both the cases I gave you. The case of the perps in Rogers, AR was a national case although unless you happened to watch Fox News you wouldn't have known about it.
The case of the perp who performed rape on his four year old son is a perp from Johnson, AR.....my partner worked the case and made the arrest. That four year old could have been saved the pain of what he will bear for the rest of his life...His father sodomized him...his father has AIDS! Did ya get it?!!!
I can assure you I am not paranoid nor delusional....thanks so much for the personal attack! I think anyone with some gray matter will agree homosexual men or women are less than ideal parents compared to the situation of one man and one woman married in stable lifestyles. Life is hard enough on kids without adding another complex relationship they are too young to understand in the name of political correctness.
76
posted on
01/01/2005 6:11:06 PM PST
by
missanne
(Go to work, write letters to the editor!)
To: Ahban; TheBattman; RightOnline; goldstategop; steplock
77
posted on
01/01/2005 6:15:03 PM PST
by
missanne
(Go to work, write letters to the editor!)
To: steplock; YOUGOTIT; sweetliberty
78
posted on
01/01/2005 6:21:11 PM PST
by
missanne
(Go to work, write letters to the editor!)
To: missanne
More twaddle!!! I don't need to post a link. I'm a law enforcement officer and had first hand knowledge of both the cases I gave you.
Ah, so because you work in law enforcement, anecdotal evidence suddenly becomes valid.
Earl Kimmerling makes you proud, doesn't he?
79
posted on
01/01/2005 6:24:46 PM PST
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!Ah, but)
To: pjacobs
Wow - you can't even live with a sign off with well wishes.
God created the sinner, not the sin. God loves us all, despite our sins. But he gives us a way to overcome our sins and to hold back our sinful nature.
80
posted on
01/01/2005 6:25:28 PM PST
by
TheBattman
(Islam (and liberals)- the cult of Satan)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-96 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson