Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge rules gay couples have right to marry in Kentucky
WAVE3 News ^ | 07/01/2014 | Scott Adkins

Posted on 07/01/2014 9:35:32 AM PDT by GIdget2004

Judge John Heyburn issued an opinion on Tuesday that Louisville gay couples are entitled to marry one another because denying them to do so violated the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.

However, couples can't rush to get married.

In Love vs Beshear, Judge Heyburn stayed the order pending the 6th Circuit of Appeals ruling. Oral arguments are set for August 6.

(Excerpt) Read more at wave3.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Kentucky
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda; kentucky
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

1 posted on 07/01/2014 9:35:32 AM PDT by GIdget2004
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

Silly Judge! This is Kentucky!! only Cousins can marry there!


2 posted on 07/01/2014 9:36:20 AM PDT by wyowolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

Ironic name, oughtta be Hate vs. Beshear


3 posted on 07/01/2014 9:36:33 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

Before anyone asks:

“On the recommendation of Senator Mitch McConnell, Heyburn was nominated by President George H. W. Bush on March 20, 1992.”


4 posted on 07/01/2014 9:36:49 AM PDT by GIdget2004
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wyowolf

beat me to it. :)


5 posted on 07/01/2014 9:38:33 AM PDT by V_TWIN (white pri)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

6 posted on 07/01/2014 9:38:53 AM PDT by Viennacon (Rebuke the Repuke!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

This doesn’t appear to be about the constitution at all but about the latest gay buzz.


7 posted on 07/01/2014 9:40:25 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

I got into it with some homosexuals on Facebook last week when I asked them, “why do homosexuals need more rights than the rest of us?”.

The replies I received were that I was arrogant or that they just wanted equal rights.

So I clarified my question. I asked,

Why does 2% of the population have the right to FORCE the other 98% to accept homosexual behavior?

Absolutely silence from them all.


8 posted on 07/01/2014 9:44:39 AM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; We need a second party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

No its NOT.

THis damn judge like all the others is legislating from the bench. There is nothing in the Constitution to back up these court decisions and they should be nullified by popular will.


9 posted on 07/01/2014 9:49:17 AM PDT by ZULU (Impeach Obama NOW.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Bad ruling. All individuals in KY, gay or straight, have the right to marry an unmarried consenting adult of the opposite sex who is not their parent, child, first cousin, or first cousin once removed. The state of KY is applying the same rules to everyone. This does not deny equal protection, it just enforces the real definition of marriage.

10 posted on 07/01/2014 9:49:51 AM PDT by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ZULU

This is ruling by buzz, not by law.


11 posted on 07/01/2014 9:53:41 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004; AFA-Michigan; Abathar; Absolutely Nobama; Albion Wilde; AliVeritas; Antoninus; ...
I'm sure Rand Paul is secretly quite pleased.

Homosexual Agenda Ping

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.

Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.

Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.

12 posted on 07/01/2014 9:57:41 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wyowolf
The 14th amendment was passed (because of Democrats ignoring the plain meaning of laws) after the Civil war to guarantee equal rights to former slaves. It was never intended so that one state could pass some idiotic law and then force other states to have the same law under the "equal protection clause".

Can I ride my motorcycle into MA without a helmet, without insurance, pistol open carried on my side, with my silenced assault rifle strapped across my back, smoking a joint? I would probably be shot but it's perfectly legal to all of that in various states.

It's just another Neo-Com tactic. This is what happens when we let government usurp powers that were never enumerated.

13 posted on 07/01/2014 9:57:58 AM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

Homo marriage isnt recognized by God. homos are married only in the eyes of man and.the devil. Since God instituted Marriage His will is irrefutable. tough sh!t homos u aint married in Gods eyes and Gods people!


14 posted on 07/01/2014 9:58:08 AM PDT by Gasshog (DemoKKKrats: Leaders of the Free Sh!t World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: wyowolf

OK.. Pretty funny, but bad news still.


15 posted on 07/01/2014 9:58:08 AM PDT by BurningOak (Live Free or Die)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: V_TWIN

Maybe the ruling is aimed at the “ghey” cousin crowd?


16 posted on 07/01/2014 10:00:53 AM PDT by wyowolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine

To answer your question its is not the 2% of homosexuals that is pushing this. Homosexuals are basically broken people that think that getting a same-sex marriage will heal them of their pain, some just want a tax write off or hospital visitation rights. It is the 20% of hardcore liberals that see this as a battering ram against religion, and they are the ones behind the push. They have convinced a big chunk of the apolitical majority that they should be protective of homosexuals. Together these three now form an electoral majority.


17 posted on 07/01/2014 10:03:35 AM PDT by BurningOak (Live Free or Die)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1; All

the judges are buying into the myth of “born that way” for behavior. They are dumping the conditioning (see also recruiting) explanations for such behaviors.

Historically canning british students had very strange results on their fetishes as adults. (bf skinner)

this just is more evidence judges are scientifically stupid.


18 posted on 07/01/2014 10:04:24 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BurningOak

What I said was true, but I know and understand who is pushing it.


19 posted on 07/01/2014 10:07:17 AM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; We need a second party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004
We seriously need to stop letting the libs frame the arguments.

There is no 'right' to marry. If there were, you could sue someone for not marrying you just because you asked.
(This is not to be confused with someone who says they'll marry you then won't. That's breach of contract)

Marriage is a Privilege to be engaged in by those who meet the criteria. One man and one woman who share no closely related ties by blood.

----

The country is being killed by people who think they have the right to define......EVERYTHING!

20 posted on 07/01/2014 10:08:29 AM PDT by MamaTexan (I am a Person as created by the Laws of Nature, not a person as created by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson