Posted on 07/06/2006 12:54:02 PM PDT by longtermmemmory
Dean calls justification used in New York ruling on gay marriage 'bigoted, outdated' Today in New York:
New York's highest court today turned back a broad attempt by gay and lesbian couples across the state to win the right to marry and raise children under New York State's marriage law, saying that denying marriage to same-sex couples does not violate the state constitution. In a 4-2 decision, the Court of Appeals found that the state's definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman, enacted more than a century ago, could have a rational basis, and that it was up to the State Legislature, not the courts, to decide whether it should be changed.
Governor Dean responded to the decision in a written statement, saying:
As Democrats, we believe that every American has a right to equal protection under the law and to live in dignity. And we must respect the right of every family to live in dignity with equal rights, responsibilities and protections under the law. Today's decision by the New York Court of Appeals, which relies on outdated and bigoted notions about families, is deeply disappointing, but it does not end the effort to achieve this goal. As that essential process moves forward, it is up to the State legislature to act to protect the equal rights of every New Yorker and for the debate on how to ensure those rights to proceed without the rancor and divisiveness that too often surrounds this issue.
According to the National Stonewall Democrats, New York Democrats may be on their way towards achieving that goal:
The New York State Democratic Party overwhelmingly passed a resolution in 2003 that calls for marriage recognition for same sex couples in the state. Additionally, the majority of New Yorkers support marriage equality according to a recent poll released in April. Gubernatorial nominee and Attorney General Eliot Spitzer is one of a number of leading Democrats in New York who has pledged to work with the state legislature to pass legislation granting marriage equality to same-sex couples.
Ta logical extension. Separate bathrooms MUST be discrimination by the reasoning used to support gay marriage. If I could afford to bring trivial lawsuits for the purpose of advancing a political agenda like the ACLU, I'd do it just to demonstrate this. The underlying premise is that men and women are not only equal, but identical in the eyes of government. This follows from the radical feminist agenda pushed by NOW, among other things. Same premise (which also explains the hyperventilation in support for abortion from liberals).
I think that's how Mass got to gay marriage - their constitution has an "equal rights amendment," which shows the mischief it can cause.
I commend New York’s highest court for ruling that the judicial branch may not impose sodomiage by fiat. Bravo!
As for Dean claiming that the courts relied on “outdated and bigoted notions about families,” that is simply name-calling, nothing more.
In countries where sodomiage is legal, the result is not an increase in homosexual linkings, but a precipitous drop in the number of marriages.
And who is hurt by the degradation of marriage? Women and children.
Protecting society is neither outdated nor bigoted.
Pretty much says it all, doesn't it.
We live in a new, hip, with-it society, not the one that's been around for 200+ years.
actually that was not the way.
The judge relied on the ABA's revision of the domestic relations law where marriage was based on adult sex acts and children were mere "accessories" to breeding couples.
She essentially ignored all law and ration and just ruled by fiat. She tried to diguise her pronouncment by releasing the opinion (which she, contrary to tradition, wrote all alone with zero peer review) on the aniversary of Brown vs Board in order to give sanction to the born homosexual myth as analogous to the bogus skin color argument.
There is no "law" to support the mass opinion. Only political fiat.
Keep 'em talking. Just when we thought the Democrat freakshow couldn't get any freakier, John Kerry showed up. We thought that was it. Then Howard Dean raised his freaky head. Then who slithered onto the stage but Cindy Sheehan. The freakshow just gets freakier and freakier. Keep the spotlight on 'em--just in case there's somebody in America who hasn't reached for an emesis basin yet.
Americans can debate the marriage issue all they want. That's what democracies are all about.
But the way liberals try to institutionalize their agenda through the courts is INFURIATING!
It seems to me that the Dems have thoroughly lost track of what most Americans feel about gay folks. Most Americans, like me, feel gays are just there and we don't like to think about their private behavior. However, Dems pushing gay marriage brings their behavior to the forefront and leaves most Americans completely disgusted. And many mainstream Democrat Americans feel the same way. I recently asked a Democrat friend how he felt about gay marriage. He's a devout Catholic and he said "This gay marriage thing is beyond sick".
How can you live "in dignity" when you take a penis up the anus then suck on it?
So Mad Howe believes in Gay marriage and wants to court the evangelical vote? Fagetaboutit.
Leviticus 18:22 is very emphatic about homosexuality.....
calls it an abomination.
So Mad Howe believes in Gay marriage and wants to court the evangelical vote? Fagetaboutit.
Leviticus 18:22 is very emphatic about homosexuality.....
calls it an abomination.
>>In a 4-2 decision, the Court of Appeals found that the state's definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman, enacted more than a century ago, could have a rational basis, and that it was up to the State Legislature, not the courts, to decide whether it should be changed.<<
So judicial restraint in NY and judicial over-reach in Georgia on the same day on the same issue with the same result. Ironic.
Dean calls justification used in New York ruling on gay marriage 'bigoted, outdated' Today in New York...
Ted Kennedy also used the "bigoted" term for opponents of same sex "marriage". It seems to be the new talking point, consistent with the liberal effort to outlaw or demonize any public expression of belief that homosexual activity is immoral or should not be promoted by the government.
Give that guy a megaphone. He's the best "ghost" candidate the GOP has.
Fo de chillins,fo de chillins, vote democRAT! Screw de chillins. The democRAT Party sez so. Hah,what forkin jerks.
The NEA just change the word "tollerate" for "ACCEPT"
in all their union documents refering to homosexuals.
In other words, to be part of the NEA you must now ACCEPT homosexuality not just tollerate it.
The NEA also says opposition to the forced ACCEPTANCE is only mere christians.
forgot to mention NEA = VERY BIG Democrat supporter.
In fact in FL the teacher's union essentially is the democrat party.
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.