Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Does anyone know if this will have any effect on NC's recent adoption of their "Religious Freedom" law?
No state law will be able to prevent gays from marrying. There are also federal laws that prevent discrimination for marriage in certain circumstances, so that might come into play as well.
No state law will be able to prevent gays from marrying. There are also federal laws that prevent discrimination for marriage in certain circumstances, so that might come into play as well.
Aye ... My feelings, too, are that the bolded words, above, are going to make NC's new law invalid. More, predictably wasted time by the NC administration.
Marriage is not defined as a right in said constitution.
Marriage is a fundamental right, and has been described as such by the United States Supreme Court in ruling after ruling going all the way back to the 19th century. Even the dissenting Justices don't disagree on that point - they simply assert that the compelling interest of the government to prohibit gays from marrying is sufficient to supersede the fundamental right of marriage. Justice Scalia, for example, fully joined Justice O'Connor's majority opinion in Turner v. Safley (1987), which explicitly reiterated that the, and I quote, "decision to marry is a fundamental right”.
At any rate, congratulations to all the gay people, their families, and friends. Special congratulations to my daughter and DIL who will be married 2 years this August in NY. They can now go anywhere in the Country, including Florida where we live, and their marriage must be recognized by the state they visit, or should move to. This is precisely the problems the Lovings faced with interracial marriage, and WHY the SC cited what they did.
The only sad part is that this decision was not UNANIMOUS.
Actually no. I have a Gay son who we threw a Civil Commitment ceremony for him and his partner 6 years ago.
I just believe the Govt should stay out of all aspects of our Bedrooms.
Marriage has been defined by all cultures worldwide for Centuries. I'm all for Civil Unions.
I beg to differ with you. Marriage to me means a Commitment by two individuals who love each other. Let me ask you a Question?
How would you like to be 'Civil Unionized" instead of being "Married"? Doesn't sound so great huh?
I have no problem with a Gay couple being Married in any Church that wants to recognize and do the wedding.
Next we will see lawsuits to force Churches to Marry just like we have seen Bakers forced to make cakes.
Let the Govt recognize Unions of people and give them equal rights. Govt should not force Religions to accept something against their Beliefs.
I 100% agree we should have moved all marriage from the government and replaced it with civil unions. Oddly enough most of the people I have known to be against this were very religious people.
Why do all of the liberals, who want nothing to do with God, insist on non-believers having the right to be "married" in the eyes of that same God?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
