Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Federal Judge strikes down the Defense of Marriage Law

Yep, a Boston judge (friend of Barny Frank maybe) declares the law to be unconstitutional.
link to story

Yep! I know that Judge is QUEER cuz everytime I kissed him he giggled!!

Anything to distract from the deficit and economy...

Funny, it was Constitutional for twenty years or so. We must have amended the Constitution when I wasn't looking.

The Defense of Marriage Law should never have been federal law in the first place. It's a State issue not a federal issue.

absolutely. they're working overtime to keep the lemmings on tract, seems like. counter that with the reality that a lot of lemmings are beginning to wake-up.

It'll be a national problem sooner or later because I'll guarantee you that a gay couple that gets "married" in a state where it's legal will move to a state where it's not and file a lawsuit to have their "rights" acknowledged across state lines.

You are correct. Obama will not defend it. He is too busy suing for the rights of illegals. He is also courting the cash contributions from the gay crowd.

Ernie

Should ban all marriage, let the dang divorce lawyers go broke, and let those of us smart enough to stay single quit being persecuted by taxation.

For a few thousand it wasn't even a topic of discussion, unless one preferred burning tied to a chunk of tree.

Ah, the good old days when men were men and gays were damnable sodomites.

Then why does the Federal Internal Revenue Service ask if you're single or married?

Actually, it was 3 federal judges in a federal appeals court). Two of the three were appointed by (wait for it) republican presidents and one by Ronald Reagan. And you know what a crazy pinko he was! In the past, the states have decided who meets criteria for marriage (age, degree of relationship that prevented marriage, etc). The Feds stuck their nose in where it had never been at least not since it struck down laws against interracial marriages, with the DOMA. And yes, states recognize marriages conducted in other states as legal, which is why you don't have to get remarried whenever you cross states lines. But if one state won't recognize some marriages conducted in other states, I expect eventually they will get really pissy with each other. Like, making anyone married in (your state here, like North Carolina) has to be remarried if living in our state to receive our state's right to file joint state taxe returns.

OH MY!

To determines your filing status. The IRS accepts whatever the states have for marriage laws.

OH MY!

Better still make your vows to one another before God Almighty and form a 3 way contract without the nod of approval of various government. Like everything else under the sun government wants to kick the creator and His dictates aside and insert themselves in His place, assuming (usurping?) all authorities over the relationship in the process.

Study the 3 blood covenants for further understanding. Government shouldn't have anything to do with marriage nor the fruits thereof. It's none of their business.


And I'll say again for all who may have missed it before, the term "gay marriage" is the problem. Can the euphemism and call it what it is.

Homosexual Holy Matrimony

See how far they get arguing for THAT unholy horseshit.

Take their fictitious language away from liberals and you instantly let most of the air out of their sails.

Homosexual marrigage would only be holy, if conducte according to religous dictates. Otherwise it is just marriage conducted civil auspicies. I know that in some places (I think France?) you needed two ceremonies: one religious (if you wanted one) and one civil. Can anyone comment that knows more about that?

Homosexual marriage is an oxymoron; emphasis on 'moron'. And the term is "homosexual" not "gay". Gay is happy, carefree, skipping down a sidewalk in the sunshine, etc. Homosexual on the other hand defines a sexual preference for person(s) of the same sex; as in buggering your buddy if male or lickity split if female. "Gay" is an invented slang adjective used to denote a positive image of homosexuality; the inverse of slang adjectives like queer, [bleep], ckskr, lesbo, dike and others which denote a negative image. Of course "Gay" is a politically correct slang term while slang terms Q,F,C,L, or D are not. Don't believe it? Get in a conversation with someone using the term "Gay" for homosexuality and start substituting the words [bleep], queer, etc. After all, a slang term is a slang term right? Liberals will freak out and most 'conservatives', at least in mixed company, will become very uncomfortable.

I prefer to be accurate and simply use the accurate term "homosexual". As for "homosexual marriage"...these are mutually exclusive words, they do not and cannot function together. "Marriage" means a union of heterosexual individuals and has forever at least until progressive socialists started rewriting our dictionaries. If two individuals of the same sex wish to join in a secular contractual relationship then so be it. But a new name will have to be deployed and it ain't marriage.

Effects everything from bankruptcy rights to IRS filing status. Let 2 different states decide that marriage means something completely different and you have an equal protection issue under the Constitution.

2 [bleep] in Massachusetts versus 2 [bleep] in Texas. 1 set get treated as married filing jointly by IRS since they are granted "marriage", the other set must file single. Has 14th Amendment complaint written all over it.

Yes, and that is why this decision is so fuxxored. You know this is just a set-up for the Feds to "resolve" that issue, making homosexual "marriage" the law of the land.