Shared publicly  - 
 
 
California gay marriage case looks headed to Supreme Court

+Reuters reports that the ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has cleared the way for the Supreme Court to consider California's gay marriage ban, declining an appeal to revisit the case.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/05/us-california-gay-idUSBRE8540XX20120605

Photo: Gay Marriage advocates, San Francisco, California, February 7, 2012. (Beck Diefenbach/+Reuters).

______

Get real-time breaking news updates on your Android, iPhone or Kindle Fire with one of our free apps: http://www.breakingnews.com/about/mobile
______
27
5
William Hodson's profile photoMaureen Vidal's profile photoTim Horner's profile photoAmber Heckmann's profile photo
15 comments
 
You can change the conctituion, but not the Bible.   It is not a matter of civil government.  But a moral issue with God. 
We voted on it,  They lost, now get over it.  But the liberal activist judges know better.  Know better than God.   So they ram this perversion down our throats.
 
Pretty sure the church controlling the government ended back in Europe many many years ago. Here, we have something called separation of church and state. Therefore, the bible has nothing to do with laws and the government. Marriage is a government issue, not a church issue.  The church can keep people from marrying in the church, but this is about the government controlling marriage licenses and the right for ALL couples to be recognized by the GOVERNMENT and awarded the same LEGAL privileges. If you feel god has a problem with gay people, then don't be gay. You however have no right to control another person and tell them who to love. No more than a father had the right to SELL his daughter for livestock. Just as that no longer exists, this too will soon be just a memory.
But how dare you think that you are so much better than another human being that YOU have the right to control a person's happiness. 
 
Actually you can change the Bible its been done several times. And I don't remember seeing God as the Author.
 
+Mike Schroepfer we live in a free country, free from religious persecution. Your beliefs and opinions have no place in our laws. You do as you see fit, but others will not live by your beliefs. My gay friends have the right to marry the person they love.
 
Why is this still an issue in 2012?
 
+Mike Schroepfer Your post confuses the hell out of me. Could you explain what conctituion means? Don't think the bible can be changed? Hello???? Catholic church! How many versions of the bible are there? Yeah, pretty sure you're wrong there.

BTW, hope your aren't wearing 2 different fibers in your photo. We all know what good ole Leviticus has to say about that! Wouldn't want you sinning now would we!
 
Our laws and freedoms come from Scripture.   We won our freedom  with the slogan of "no king but King Jesus"   Itls not religous persecution I'm worred about, but the wrath of God.
 
No, you are wrong. Our laws do not come from scripture. Show me where Christianity is mentioned anywhere in the bible.
 
Our laws and freedom came from men. Just like most of our scriptures. It is impossible for us to know what is Gods will and what is one man's manipulation of what really happened. All we can do is do our best chose between what's right and what's wrong. And there's nothing good about denying anyone from having the same rights as me.
 
We shouldn't be trying to make gay marriage legal.  We should be trying to make ALL MARRIAGE ILLEGAL.  Marriage, despite being treated as a legal institution, is a construct born from religion, and more importantly, from a small subset of the plethora of religions available in the world, both in 1776 and today.  By virtue of writing Marriage, even the vague concept of it, into law in the US, we have already endorsed a specific religious concept.

Treat married couples as 2 single people under the tax and various benefit codes, and abolish ALL legal marriage.  The most equal way to handle this, rather than every new minority having to fight tooth and nail to gain equal freedom with the majority, is to simply abolish it as a legal concept outright.

Short of that, we will keep re-fighting this to the end of time.  We have bigger problems.  The world is melting, the air is becoming toxic, we can't produce enough electrical power to keep the lights on, and over 60% of the world doesn't even have drinking water.  We have large, serious issues to deal with.  Giving the LGBT community the right to marry is a band-aid for the greater problem of wasting time and government funds getting anyone married at all, which should not be the government's job, period.

You're a christian and want to go marry someone?  Go to a priest.  You're a gay/lesbian person and want to marry someone?  Go to a less discriminatory priest.  Either way, let's stop making this out to be an issue that government should be wasting its time on to begin with and move on to the bigger, more important jobs.
 
Amazing isn't he? I'd vote for you Austin M. If that concept would even be considered, and it should. I would support it. This issue has generated so much hate and wasted so much time and money when it could be solved very simply.
 
+Michael Rios What can I say?  Most look at the problem inside the box and ask how we can reshape the box to fix the problem.  Nobody stops to ask what the fuck good the box is doing to begin with.  And why should they?  If the box goes away, people can't make money selling decorations for the box or extra reinforcement for the walls of the box or whatever else they're pushing.

The problem isn't the options, it's the debate itself.  We're debating whether or not a religious view should be made into law - yet the very law we seek to make (or unmake) is itself already a legalese version of an otherwise wholly religious view to begin with, that should have never been made law itself.

I fully support monogamy.  Doesn't mean I want my taxes funding an entire separate branch of the US court system - Domestic Relations law - to regulate it.  It's simple.  Go to your church, say your vows, and if you break them, let your gods you have so much faith in handle the fallout.  I see no reason why I should have to pay for any of it.
 
People are way too concerned if someone marries someone of their same gender. They act like if they're paying for the wedding or something. If people want to ensure the sanctity of marriage then maybe making it more difficult to marry for everyone is the real answer since right now you can marry someone you've only known an hour.
 
It's an affrount to God.  God created marrage to be between a man & a woman.   He rained fire & brinestone down on Sodom & Gamoaria.   It is his way, not mine.
 
+HKCoffeeBean +Mike Schroepfer I can:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+18%3A22&version=NIV
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+20%3A13&version=NIV

So yes, over 2,000 years ago, some raving idiot thought outlawing gay marriage (or rather, gay sex, technically gay marriage isn't ever covered in the bible...) was a good idea.

I think you are BOTH missing the point here.  You are having a debate about whether or not marriage - a wholly religious concept - should be expanded under the law to include the LGBT community.  What you are both missing is that the proper, correct solution here is to collapse marriage law, rather than expand it, to include NOBODY.

The law should not be regulating marriage, gay, straight, or otherwise.  This is EXACTLY why we have separation of church and state in the first place - so a specific religion's morals are not allowed to shape law that affects everyone, even those who are not religious (such as myself.)  Any attempt to correct law which is borne from religion is doomed to failure and you are both playing a losing game here.

Remove marriage from the law, make it a religion-handled affair as it was always meant to be, and the problem will solve itself - you merely have to drive down the street another block to a church that will let you marry.
Add a comment...