Posted on 06/06/2014 2:44:04 PM PDT by Oliviaforever
A United States District Court judge has ruled that Wisconsin's gay marriage ban is unconstitutional.
Judge Barbara Crabb issued a motion of summary judgment for the paintiffs, stating that Article XIII of the Wisconsin Constitution "violates planitiffs' fundamental right to marry and their right to equal protection of laws under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution."
(Excerpt) Read more at m.wisn.com ...
Barbara Crabb, Jimmy Carter appointment.
I just really doubt we’re going to put up with this much longer. Let them have their fun.
Judges have no power to impose gay marriage
They cannot make law
Overturning a “ban” does not mean the state has to recognize gay “marriage”
Exactly what part of the Constitution does it violate?
The US Constitution says NOTHING about marriage.
In state after state, judges overturn the will of the people... with less than 10% of the population, the homosexuals sure know how to push their cause.
Wisconsin passed it’s amendment by 59% in 2006. Wiki has Wisconsin actually having a repeal referendum scheduled for 2014, doubt that happens now.
I’ll never forget what the big media story was when judges struck down the first ones in this wave after the SC’s DOMA decision—it was about a cable reality show star saying he thought gay acts were gross right before Christmas. The station suspended him, the show’s merch sold out for Christmas as folks bought it in solidarity and they reinstated him in time for the premier episode which got record ratings. That was the big story.
FReegards
A gay marriage ban was not the way to accomplish what the state wanted to accomplish. Their best route would have been to join with all the other states in DOMA type legislation that included a provision that it was not reviewable by the Scotus. Then, of course, there was the marriage amendment to the Constitution: marriage shall consist of a union only of one man and one woman.
As always conseratives were sold a bill of goods about DOMA when they should have pressed for the amendment. It would have passed back then.
Marriage is the Holy union of a man and a woman for the purpose of procreation.
A civil union is permission from the State for 2 individuals to receive the benefits and responsibilities of a union granted by the state.
I was for the amendment, but knew it wouldn’t pass Congress by the required margins.
“Overturning a “ban” does not mean the state has to recognize gay “marriage””
And which state will do this?
No Governor has enough spine
its impossible to look at the 14th Amendment and see what these idiot judges “see”.
the federal govt isnt the only thing that needs to be abolished by “we the people”.
the peasants need to grab torches and pitchforks.
It would appear that Cobra’s disdain for judges was totally warranted. 90% scum.
It had a chance back then
“Overturning a “ban” does not mean the state has to recognize gay “marriage””
Obama would send in troops.
She is not well thought of according to the posts on robe probe which rates judges.
I think DOMA was enacted in 1996, two years or so before the first state constitutional amendments passed, Alaska(68%) and Hawaii(71%). So I think an actual constitutional maybe had a chance in the mid-late 90s. But I think there would also be a chance it would simply be repealed 20 years later.
FReegards
You are correct, and that makes it a 10th amendment issue, completely up the the States and The People.
It’s that darn 14th Amendent.
It should have been repealed after Recinstruction.
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.