CTH Public Relations

• Torture by CO2HOG [May 02, 2012, 10:19:42 PM]
• China by CO2HOG [March 31, 2012, 02:24:13 PM]
• Global Warming Watch by TonyBlair [October 09, 2011, 06:41:37 PM]
• Solar Panel Doubts by TonyBlair [September 02, 2011, 08:25:23 AM]
• Barack Hussein Obama, Emp... by TonyBlair [August 10, 2011, 08:57:54 PM]
• National Debt Clocks and ... by Counter [August 08, 2011, 10:30:42 AM]
• Scanner or Pat Down? by Vocal Observer [June 28, 2011, 01:09:51 PM]
• Rise of the Police State by Vocal Observer [June 28, 2011, 01:01:03 PM]
• Who can we trust? by Vocal Observer [June 08, 2011, 01:07:59 PM]
• Anthony Wiener's wiener i... by CarolinaBuckeye [June 01, 2011, 11:29:22 PM]
• Democrat's Culture of Cor... by TonyBlair [May 18, 2011, 06:55:46 AM]
• Hey Obama..You want Taxes... by Vince the Fox [April 21, 2011, 03:12:25 AM]
• Obama Policy Watch by TonyBlair [April 20, 2011, 06:56:14 AM]
• George W. Obama by TonyBlair [April 19, 2011, 06:11:57 AM]
• The Religion of Peace Upd... by TonyBlair [April 12, 2011, 06:43:20 AM]

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

Members

• Total Members: 329
• Latest: boborians

Stats

• Total Posts: 40602
• Total Topics: 5158
• Online Today: 18
• Online Ever: 252
• (April 10, 2011, 07:49:21 AM)

Users Online

Users: 0
Guests: 17
Total: 17

EducateWorthington.org

The 912 Project - Glenn Beck

912 Group of Central Ohio

Please let me know if you'd like your link added

[Edmund Burke]

Calif. Court Voids Gay Nuptial Licenses

Thursday, August 12, 2004
Fox News Online


SAN FRANCISCO — The California Supreme Court (search) ruled unanimously Thursday that San Francisco's mayor overstepped his authority by issuing same-sex marriage licenses this spring. The court also voided all the marriages of gay and lesbian couples sanctioned by the city.

Click here to read the court's ruling.

The court said the city violated the law when it issued the certificates and performed the marriage ceremonies in a monthlong wedding march that began Feb. 12, since both legislation and a voter-approved measure defined marriage as a union between a man and woman.

The court, however, did not resolve whether the California Constitution would permit a same-sex marriage, ruling instead on the narrow issue of whether local officials could bypass California's judicial and legislative branches.

Full Story

Really its not encouraging news at all, because the courts only ruled that local officials can't just declare gay marriage to be ok.  It leaves the door open to the question of the legality of gay marriage- Infact, it will push the issue.

[Edmund Burke]

True, but it beats them ruling that it's OK for local mayors to make such decisions.  As I said, good news on this issue is scarce...this is relatively good news given the alternative.

Matt...I'm looking for more!

I understand- And I agree with you.


Its just once this issue is forced, the kooky left-coast judges will start deciding, and could push it into a big Federal-level s*** storm for judicial tyranny.  Any judicial decision on gay marriage makes me nervous.

Wouldn't it be nice if marriage could just be whateveryone though it was about a year and a half ago?

Wouldn't it be nice if marriage could just be whateveryone though it was about a year and a half ago?

Here's my theory... I think that the next generation will have "marriage contracts" that last a limited length of time... say five to ten years.  And when the contract is up, both parties either re-up or go their own way.

Of course, this will encourage couples to keep their finances separate, and marriage might come to be viewed as strictly a "legal thing" required to get the good insurance rates, etc.  Just further erosion of that sacred covenant that two people make together for life.

In fact, if things continue the way they're going, I'd even put $$$ down on that bet.

Thats sad- We are slowing chipping away at the moral fabric of society. Mr. Butler is thrilled  

[Edmund Burke]

Well, if it comes to that, the cement that holds our society together will crumble.  When you think about what families accomplish -- through socialization, through educational funding, through mutual help, through inheritance -- you begin to understand that it really is the cornerstone of civilization.

When you get parenting by contract, people will begin to understand what they have lost ... as Scandinavia is now.  Nothing religious about it...our species is naturally inclined to small family groups...when we don't have them, we try to make them up (often this is why otherwise-sensible people follow Liberal activist groups...desperation to recreate a sense of belonging).  

[Edmund Burke]

Well, our Aussie cousins have more sense than we do...gay marriage is now illegal in Australia.  Now why couldn't we do that?

_________________________________________________
Same-Sex 'Marriage' Banned in Australia
Pacific Rim Bureau (CNSNews.com) - Australian lawmakers Friday voted to ban same-sex marriage, following an emotional debate in the country's Senate.

Members of minor parties opposing the bill called the day "Black Friday," slamming Prime Minister John Howard's conservative coalition for trying to rush it through and criticizing the official opposition Labor Party for supporting the ban.

Senator Bob Brown of the Green Party, a homosexual, accused Howard of "hatred" and following the "extreme right-wing fundamentalist currently in power in the United States."

Australian Democrats leader Andrew Bartlett, another opponent of the bill, said there was no urgency to ban same-sex marriage.

Government representatives said the matter was urgent because if lawmakers did not speedily ban same-sex marriage, the matter would be decided by the courts.

Full Story
 

[Edmund Burke]

Well, maybe the people of Louisiana will actually get to VOTE on gay marriage.  What a novel idea![/size][/font]
______________________________________________________________
Judge Won't Block La. Vote on Gay Marriage
Monday, August 16, 2004
 
BATON ROUGE, La.  — A judge on Monday refused to block a Sept. 18 statewide vote on a proposed constitutional ban on same-sex marriages (search).

Amendment opponents said they would appeal. Time is critical because the secretary of state is facing a deadline this week to get ballots to the printer.

Louisiana already has a law stating that marriage can be only between a man and woman, but supporters of the amendment want to protect that law in the Constitution.

A group called Forum for Equality (search) sued, arguing the ban would violate the Louisiana Constitution's guarantee of individuals' rights to enter into contracts and own property together.

Judge Michael Caldwell heard arguments Monday and refused to order the amendment removed from the ballot. He ruled that under Louisiana law such a challenge can be made only after an election is held.

On Friday, another judge filed a temporary order blocking the vote because Sept. 18 is not a statewide election date, as the Constitution requires. However, he suspended his order so the state can appeal directly to the Louisiana Supreme Court. That judge scheduled a trial for Friday on whether to make his order permanent.

 http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,129143,00.html
 

[Edmund Burke]

DOMA survives its first legal challenge!  I wonder if that can last.[/font]

_________________________________________________
August 18, 2004, 8:44 a.m.
A Good Start  NRO Online
Shannon W. Coffin
In re Kandu is a victory for democracy and the rule of law.

Fast on the heels of a recent Washington State court decision holding that homosexuals had a right to marry under Washington state law, a federal judge in the same state ruled this week that the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines marriage under federal law in light of the traditional opposite-sex definition of the term, is constitutional. The decision in In re Kandu was the first legal challenge to DOMA to be decided by a U.S. court. While it is only round one in a series of legal challenges to DOMA beginning to percolate around the country, the decision represents a significant victory for the majority of Americans who believe in the rule of law and the rule of representative democracy.


Full Story

[Edmund Burke]

So, the damage of the Mass. gay-marriage "law" is limited for the time being.  Good news, as far as it goes.[/size]
______________________________________________________
Mass. Judge Upholds Law Limiting Marriage

Wednesday, August 18, 2004



BOSTON — A Superior Court judge on Wednesday declined to halt enforcement of a 1913 state law barring out-of-state couples from marrying in Massachusetts.

Eight same-sex couples from out of state -- including two from Rhode Island -- had asked Superior Court Judge Carol Ball for a preliminary injunction blocking the state from enforcing the law, arguing that it was discriminatory. It prohibits any marriages that would not be legal in the couple's home state.

On May 17, Massachusetts became the first state where same-sex marriages (search) are recognized. Gov. Mitt Romney (search) and Attorney General Thomas Reilly ruled, however, that the 1913 law prohibited out-of-state couples from taking advantage of that new right.

An attorney for the couples expressed disappointment Wednesday but said they would continue to push the case to a full hearing.

Full Story
 

[They needed to obtain signatures from more than 5 percent of registered voters in at least 44 of the state's 88 counties; they ended up getting enough in 79. By early September, they will likely collect another 100,000 signatures, because Ohio law allows groups to do so in the event that some petitions are thrown out. Most observers expect the measure will qualify.]

Not only is The Ohio Campaign to Protect Marriage well on its way to getting a gay marriage ban on the ballot, if it does it will almost certainly pass.  Moreover, this issue could be what helps Bush win the swing states. [/size]

________________________________________________
Marriage at the Polls (The Weekly Standard)
From the August 30, 2004 issue: Will gay-marriage initiatives give Bush a boost on November 2?
by Mark Stricherz
08/30/2004, Volume 009, Issue 47

WHEN PHIL BURRESS goes home at night, his phones and doorbell ring long past suppertime. Burress is the chairman of the Ohio Campaign to Protect Marriage, a coalition seeking to put an initiative on the ballot in November that would amend the state's constitution to ban homosexual marriage altogether and domestic partnership benefits for public employees. He took the position in May, and ever since folks have been contacting him at all hours asking to get his petition forms. "I got a knock on the door at 8 the other night from a Muslim who said, 'We want you to help at our [mosque],'" he says wearily. "Everyone is running to get these things."

Burress exaggerates only a bit. From late May to August 3, his group collected 392,000 signatures--a figure initiative groups usually reach only after twice as much time. They needed to obtain signatures from more than 5 percent of registered voters in at least 44 of the state's 88 counties; they ended up getting enough in 79. By early September, they will likely collect another 100,000 signatures, because Ohio law allows groups to do so in the event that some petitions are thrown out. Most observers expect the measure will qualify.

If it does, 11 states will have marriage amendments on the ballot this November. Among them are four states expected to be competitive in the presidential race--Ohio, Michigan, Oregon, and Arkansas. Could the amendment fights in those four states affect the outcome of the presidential campaign? Although not conclusive, the evidence suggests that if there's a second Bush administration, Phil Burress may deserve an invitation to the White House.
 
 Full Story
 

[Edmund Burke]

Louisiana Voters Approve Gay-Marriage Ban

Sep 19, 11:08 AM (ET)

By KEVIN McGILL

NEW ORLEANS (AP) - Louisiana voters overwhelmingly approved a state constitutional amendment Saturday banning same-sex marriages and civil unions, one of up to 12 such measures on the ballot around the country this year.

With 99 percent of precincts reporting, the amendment was winning approval with 78 percent of the vote, and support for it was evident statewide. Only in New Orleans, home to a politically strong gay community, was the race relatively close, and even there the amendment was winning passage. Turnout statewide appeared to be about 27 percent of Louisiana's 2.8 million voters, somewhat low for a state election.[/size]
 
 Full Story
 

[Edmund Burke]

A bit of good news...there are still some sensible courts, I guess.

______________________________________
Two states say 'no' to gay marriage
New York's highest court says a constitutional right to marry does not exist. Georgia's upholds a constitutional ban.
By Ron Scherer | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

NEW YORK

In a single day, two state high courts have ruled that same-sex marriage is not permitted in their jurisdictions.

Thursday, both the Court of Appeals in New York and the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that marriage in those states will continue to be defined as between a man and a woman. In the case of New York, any changes will have to be made by the legislature. And, the court denied that the state's 97-year-old definition of marriage violated the constitutional rights of same-sex couples.

"New York's decision is a fairly narrow view of what guarantees the state constitution provides," says Jay Weiser, a law professor at Baruch University and the lead counsel in writing a brief in support of gay marriage for the New York City Bar Association.

New York and Georgia join Arizona and Indiana high courts, which have also said there is no constitutional right to gay marriages. So far, only the Massachusetts high court has ruled in favor of full same-sex marriage rights. Vermont permits equal marriage rights under civil unions.

"So far, the courts are mixed but the majority of cases have passed defense of marriage or constitutional amendments barring same-sex marriages," says Mr. Weiser.

CS Monitor - Full Story

New York is a large enough state that the stretch of Metro areas like NYC don't infect the rest of the state, unlike MA w/ Boston and their elitist filled "Higher Education" institutions.

Although positive news in the sense that the courts didn't overstep their jurisdiction, the legislature can change this outcome.