Arkansas Becomes First Bible Belt State to Allow Same-Sex Marriage After Judge Lifts Ban

More than a dozen same-sex marriage licenses were issued for the first time in a Bible Belt state Saturday after a state judge declared Arkansas' voter-approved ban on gay wedding to be unconstitutional.

About 50 couples had lined up at the courthouse in Eureka Springs in Carroll County, Arkansas, Saturday morning seeking licenses, according to Reuters.

But Carroll County Deputy Clerk Jane Osborn told The Associated Press that 15 licenses were issued Saturday.

On Friday, Pulaski County Circuit Judge Chris Piazza struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage, saying it violated equal protection provisions of the U.S. Constitution.

"This is an unconstitutional attempt to narrow the definition of equality," Piazza wrote in his decision. "The exclusion of a minority for no rational reason is a dangerous precedent."

The judge refused to put his ruling on hold, allowing same-sex couples to obtain marriage licenses.

Absolutely right.

And the written will of the people - no matter how strongly expressed - must never be allowed to override the will of 5 age addled political appointees for as long as America exists - right?

Yessirree, thats what our system is all about.

The people be damned. What matters is the usurpations of the ruling clique.

... after a state judge declared Arkansas' voter-approved ban on gay wedding to be unconstitutional.

With all due respect to patriots in Arkansas, Arkansas parents are evidently not making sure that their children are being taught the Constitution, particularly the reason for enumerated constitutional rights and 10th Amendment protected state powers. If Arkansas parents were doing their duty to make sure that the children were being taught these things, then more people in Arkansas would know the following concerning the constitutionally indefensible decision by this activist judge.

PC interpretations of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protections Clause by pro-gay activist judges aside, please consider the following. Since the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect so-called gay rights, not only are such "rights" not expressly protected by the Constitution, but the states are free to make laws which discriminate against gay agenda issues, gay marriage in this example, as long as such laws don't unreasonably abridge express constitutional protections.

Regarding how to deal with activist judges, Arkansas voters, and voters in all other states, need to work with their state lawmakers to make judicial watchdog laws which do the following. Such laws should require state judges to promptly, clearly and publicly specify which constitutional clauses they base any case decision on, noting the Constitution's silence about an issue when appropriate, or to face punitive consequences for failing to do so.

The judge did it like the one in Michigan did late on a Friday afternoon to deliberately delay the appeals process so the marriage licenses could be issued in the meantime.

This is the point where the judge jumps from having a legal/judicial lapse straight into having a massive ethical one.

The proper thing to do would be to issue the ruling, then immediately enjoin it until the appeals process runs its course. By doing what he did the judge brought about a political outcome, not a legal one.

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.