I put this in breaking news as this ruling requires Idaho to recognize other States marriages, as well as gay marriage in Idaho Friday morning.
This case will have national effect on other States that do not allow gay marriage forcing them to recognize even if they don't perform.
Suprise, surprise. Yet another tyrannical judge thinking his warped sense of reality is above thousands of years of traditions.
It’s Idaho and that means this this case if appealed will end up at the 9th Circuit.
If Otter has any balls (he doesn’t), he will order all county clerks to ignore requests for marriage licenses from same sex couples. Screw the Fed tyrants. This means war.
It will have to go before the Supremes first.
Left is right, up is down. It’s bizarro world. She’s no Idahoan. She’s just another federal tyrant.
Idaho: seriously consider nullifying the utterly unconstitutional decision.
Do you think we can all guess what the 9th Circuit and the SCOTUS will say about this case?
Where is “marriage,” gay or straight, enumerated in the Constitution??
How many of these bottom-feeding “judges” have to declare two “openly gay” homosexual men swapping bodily fluids as being “constitutional”? Sheeesh! We “get it”! You slugs and your homosexual pals trump all of the American people put together.
In other words, they are living on borrowed time, but they should continue to enjoy their lavish offices and perks until the boot hits their ass.
The supreme court seems to be siding with states rights on most issues these days. But we’ll see I guess.
Please note: There didn’t used to be any explicit “gay marriage” bans in the law.
“Gay marriage” wasn’t illegal as such, it was inconceivable. A contradiction in terms no sane person would take seriously.
Where in the constitution does it mention a right for homosexual faggots and lesbians to marry?
Uh, it is IN THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE.
Methinks these federal kangaroos need a lesson in the Tenth Amendment.
Since when do we have the RIGHT to get married?
Actually, if we’re honest, he’s right. It is unconstitutional not to accept marriages from other states.
Not promoting or condoning it. I’m simply looking at it objectively. Of course the founders had no idea this would ever be an issue. This is why we needed a constitutional amendment years ago. I saw this coming 15 years ago and said an amendment should be pushed before this crap becomes mainstream.
God help us....
“For a time is coming when people will no longer listen to sound and wholesome teaching. They will follow their own desires and will look for teachers who will tell them whatever their itching ears want to hear. They will reject the truth and chase after myths.” 2 Timothy 4 3-4
There is no way to curb such insane decisions by the courts — except simply to ignore them.
The federal courts have no authority to meddle with marriage rules of the states. This is not a constitutional authority.
As for judges who make these decision, I stop short of lynching (mainly because it would lead to a serious rope shortage); but I do think that banishment from the state would be appropriate. In search of precedent, perhaps we should consider some form of riding out of town on a rail (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riding_the_rail).
Who needs state legislatures when we have judges!