Posted on 09/29/2006 10:19:35 AM PDT by indcons
aaaarrrrrrrrrrhhhhhh.........my eyes!!!!
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
Wow. You're really that concerned about who can marry and who can't? Who the hell cares?!? Men cheat on their wives, their wives cheat on them. It's all the same. Marriage is a joke, anyways, in this country.
LOL! Scary pic!
How in the Sam Hill can a Massachusetts judge issue a binding opinion on Rhode Island law?
Doesn't a Rhode Island judge have to do the interpretation as to whether homosexual marriage is allowed in Rhode Island?
Does anybody else see how this case is absurd? Or is this ok because anything is allowed if you are seeking a politically correct outcome?
Well I guess that many will be flocking to Mass now. I thought many did a while back anyway. Didn't Rosie get married in Mass a few years ago? I don't think interstate marriage is illegal, but Rhode Island won't observe it. It really is just a ceremony. They will never learn.
For those people who have said, "We don't need a constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man and one woman!"...well, here you go. This is why we do. At the Federal level AND at the individual state levels.
The Senate screwed us on that already and now that it looks like we will lose at least a seat. I think for the next two years anyway there won't be a Marriage Constitutional Amendment passed. We lost our chance and now may never get it again. Thanks RINOS!!!!!
No, Rosie went to San Francisco when their mayor allowed homosexual weddings there.
I still remember she was pissed off at Bush because of his support for the marriage amendment, calling it the most hateful thing any president has ever done, and then went to S.F. to kiss her bride.
Brian Griffin's cousin and his Puerto Rican boytoy are just thrilled!
Wow. You're really that concerned about who can marry and who can't? Who the hell cares?!? Men cheat on their wives, their wives cheat on them. It's all the same. Marriage is a joke, anyways, in this country.
They just won't quit hurting the country, will they?
He can't change RI law. What he's saying is that *he* interprets the RI law to mean that marriage is not restricted to one man and one woman. That means that the MA law saying that a marriage is not recognized in Massachusetts if it's not recognized in another state, is not valid.
So it sounds like either (a) they can "claim" they get married in RI and MA will recognize it, or (b) they can just get married in MA and MA will recognize it. Either way, it's not a legal Rhode Island marriage...yet.
What this does, however, is give the activists a hammer to use on the Rhode Island judiciary. They can now go back there and say, "look, we married in Massachusetts and it's legal there, so therefore you must extend full faith and credit to us and recognize our marriage here in Rhode Island."
I've never been entirely comfortable with a Constitutional amendment about marriage. It seems so bloody OBVIOUS that marriage is one man and one woman, that it isn't the sort of thing that needs to be defined in a state or the Federal constitution. But uncontrolled judicial activism like this is leaving us no choice. The amendment process seems to be the only way to put some fetters on these radicals, because our legislators don't show the spines or the cojones to stop them any other way.
}:-)4
Welcome to FR. There are several things wrong with this story: (1) A Massachussetts judge making a ruling that in essence creates a new "right" to homosexual marriage in Rhode Island; (2) Judges deciding that they can legislate from the bench; (3) the tendency of liberals to try to force things on the public thru judicial fiat that they know they cannot win at the ballot box; (4) judiciary redefining the institution of marriage.
The stupidity of that assertion is beyond belief. Same-sex marriage is but one of many classes of actions that are not explicitly forbidden in the written law because there was a history of common-sense common law that would never have considered it to be necessary to prohibit such things. But maybe we can have fun with it. I'd like to get a driver's license for my pet llama. I dare you to find a constitutional amendment, statute or court decision -- that (quote) "explicitly deems void or otherwise expressly forbids a llama from getting a drivers license or from driving a car."
You may object, for example, that the llama will have difficulty passing the written portion of the driver's license test, but with judges such as this one, there should be no difficulty in having the requirement for a written test thrown out because of either the Americans With Disabilities Act (llamas need accomodation for the difficulty of holding writing instruments in their cloven hooves), or because the driver's license test was only able to be administered in English or possibly also in Spanish, but was not available in a language that the llama could understand.
is you llama an american citizen? If not, I don't think you'd have much of a case
As a resident of Rhode Island, I have to say that I'm all for this decision.
As long as Massachusetts keeps the sodomites after they pair 'em off, I'm for it.
"Wow. You're really that concerned about who can marry and who can't? Who the hell cares?!? Men cheat on their wives, their wives cheat on them. It's all the same. Marriage is a joke, anyways, in this country."
Lost your way, DUmmie? I see this topic and the comments irritated you so much that you signed up today to post this drivel.
Part of the 1913 law was a residency requirement too.
Should it not be on the part of the homosexuals to show that homoseuxal based marriage was legal in RI not the other way around?
If a state has no explicit law against animal/human marriage that too is now legal in Mass.
I wonder if the Ford company donated that Mustang in support of this homosexual parade?
So how do we fire a judge?
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.