US appeals court rules against Defense of Marriage Act
Court says key part of marriage law is unconstitutional, Supreme Court could take up the issue in its current term
NEW YORK, Oct 18 (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court in New York ruled on Thursday that a U.S. law defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman is unconstitutional. It was the second federal appeals court to reject the law, which could go before the Supreme Court soon.
The Defense of Marriage Act was passed in 1996. Since then, six states have legalized same-sex marriage but, because of the 1996 law, the federal government does not recognize same-sex marriages performed in those states.
The 2-1 decision also found that gays and lesbians are entitled to heightened protection from the courts, based on the history of discrimination the group has suffered.
Judge Chester Straub, who dissented, argued that the federal definition of marriage should be left to the political process. "If this understanding is to be changed, I believe it is for the American people to do so," he wrote.
The ruling did not address another provision of the law that says that states where same-sex marriage is illegal do not have to recognize same-sex marriages performed in states that permit it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
re: "defining marriage as... between a man and woman is unconstitutional"
Even though as stated in the above article this case does not specifically address the "states right's" issues where one state would be forced one to recognize another state's homosexual pseudo-marriages, 'when' SCOTUS takes this case, as obviously they will, and then slamdunks it, as obviously they will, the critical "state right's" issues that are at stake will afterwards not have even the slightest chance of surviving. Although the dissenting judge stated that the "federal definition of marriage should be left to the political process" the fact is well known that that has never been successful for the homosexual-agendizers, which is why this has had to work it's way through the court system to the threshold of the highest court in the land to now be rubber stamped by more appointed judges.
compare: NWO Seeks To Moot Faux-Homosexual Marriage Issue, Dissolve State's Rights 8-17-09 "The DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act), for one thing, prohibits individual states from being forced to recognize out-of-state homosexual marriages. In repealing DOMA then, the homosexual agenda is also being used as a vehicle to "remove state's rights", contributing to the deconstruction of this country. By also playing a large role in the planned expanding of "hate-crimes laws", it is being used to contribute to the loss of free speech, as speaking against the homosexual agenda has already been deemed "hateful".
Should also be noted that at some future point the homosexual pseudo-marriage agenda is going to be used to further the NWO religious 'civil unrest' agenda: Catholic Church Threatens White House With "National Conflict of Enormous Proportions" Over Homosexual Marriage 9-29-11
Rev. 18:4
Court says key part of marriage law is unconstitutional, Supreme Court could take up the issue in its current term
NEW YORK, Oct 18 (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court in New York ruled on Thursday that a U.S. law defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman is unconstitutional. It was the second federal appeals court to reject the law, which could go before the Supreme Court soon.
The Defense of Marriage Act was passed in 1996. Since then, six states have legalized same-sex marriage but, because of the 1996 law, the federal government does not recognize same-sex marriages performed in those states.
The 2-1 decision also found that gays and lesbians are entitled to heightened protection from the courts, based on the history of discrimination the group has suffered.
Judge Chester Straub, who dissented, argued that the federal definition of marriage should be left to the political process. "If this understanding is to be changed, I believe it is for the American people to do so," he wrote.
The ruling did not address another provision of the law that says that states where same-sex marriage is illegal do not have to recognize same-sex marriages performed in states that permit it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
re: "defining marriage as... between a man and woman is unconstitutional"
Even though as stated in the above article this case does not specifically address the "states right's" issues where one state would be forced one to recognize another state's homosexual pseudo-marriages, 'when' SCOTUS takes this case, as obviously they will, and then slamdunks it, as obviously they will, the critical "state right's" issues that are at stake will afterwards not have even the slightest chance of surviving. Although the dissenting judge stated that the "federal definition of marriage should be left to the political process" the fact is well known that that has never been successful for the homosexual-agendizers, which is why this has had to work it's way through the court system to the threshold of the highest court in the land to now be rubber stamped by more appointed judges.
compare: NWO Seeks To Moot Faux-Homosexual Marriage Issue, Dissolve State's Rights 8-17-09 "The DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act), for one thing, prohibits individual states from being forced to recognize out-of-state homosexual marriages. In repealing DOMA then, the homosexual agenda is also being used as a vehicle to "remove state's rights", contributing to the deconstruction of this country. By also playing a large role in the planned expanding of "hate-crimes laws", it is being used to contribute to the loss of free speech, as speaking against the homosexual agenda has already been deemed "hateful".
Should also be noted that at some future point the homosexual pseudo-marriage agenda is going to be used to further the NWO religious 'civil unrest' agenda: Catholic Church Threatens White House With "National Conflict of Enormous Proportions" Over Homosexual Marriage 9-29-11
Rev. 18:4
No comments :
Post a Comment