| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#17
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
I wonder...
On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 13:19:28 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 9/3/2015 12:43 PM, wrote: We have to start somewhere. The government used to fund and install nativity scenes on the town square but you guys "fixed" that so get busy. They were moving in that direction with the civil unions but the gay community would not accept that. Now they are reaping the fruits of that labor. I know of no federal law that REQUIRES local governments to license marriage. I am not sure that if they simply refuse to do any marriage, the court has much of a leg to stand on. That may not be finally decided until the SCOTUS rules ... or someone runs out of money to fight it. The result could be profound but I don't think that is a bad thing. Why does the government have the power to decide who can "marry" since that is a religious act? "Civil union" makes a lot more sense when you are talking about rights, obligations and privileges granted by the civil authority. That should be available to any 2 or more people who want to enter that contract. The federal judge just found Davis in contempt of court and ordered her to jail. I heard that. Political correctness run amok. I am curious exactly what law the original court cited when they made ther order she ignored. This may be tossed and the lower court reversed. Rand Paul says he knows of no Kentucky law that requires local officials to issue marriage licenses and since she stopped ALL of them, she is not discriminating against any single protected group. |
Threaded Mode
