It's becoming so routine that it doesn't even make front page news anymore.
Even though the Constitution was written hundreds of years ago, and marriage has been defined for thousands of years, and homosexual behavior has been exhibited for too many centuries, all of a sudden, over a period of a few years, judges say that citizens don't know what a marriage is?
For background, read how activist judges across America are forbidding voters the right to define marriage as between one man and one woman.
Also read President Obama's DOJ Negates Marriage Voters in 34 States
-- From "Federal Judge Overturns Virginia’s Same-Sex Marriage Ban" by Erik Eckholm, New York Times 2/14/14
“Our Constitution declares that ‘all men’ are created equal,” wrote Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen of United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, in Norfolk. “Surely this means all of us.”
The ruling, which overturned a constitutional amendment adopted by Virginia voters in 2006 as well as previous laws, also said that Virginia must respect same-sex marriages that were carried out legally in other states.
But opponents of same-sex marriage have vowed to appeal the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, and Judge Wright Allen stayed the execution of Thursday’s ruling pending the appeal.
But many legal experts believe that this case, or another among the dozens now being argued in federal district or appeals courts around the country, will eventually be taken up by the United States Supreme Court.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Federal judge strikes down Va. ban on gay marriage" by Robert Barnes, Washington Post 2/13/14
Virginia Attorney General Mark R. Herring (D), who had switched the state’s legal position on the issue and joined two gay couples in asking that the ban be struck down, has said the state will continue to enforce the prohibitions until the legal process is completed.
“Gay and lesbian individuals share the same capacity as heterosexual individuals to form, preserve and celebrate loving, intimate and lasting relationships,” Wright Allen wrote. “Such relationships are created through the exercise of sacred, personal choices — choices, like the choices made by every other citizen, that must be free from unwarranted government interference.”
Wright Allen added: “Tradition is revered in the Commonwealth, and often rightly so. However, tradition alone cannot justify denying same-sex couples the right to marry any more than it could justify Virginia’s ban on interracial marriage.”
She joined a so-far unanimous group of federal judges considering a question that Supreme Court justices left unanswered in June in their first consideration of gay marriage: Does a state’s traditional role in defining marriage mean it may ban same-sex unions without violating the equal protection and due process rights of gay men and lesbians?
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Gay marriage coming to the South? Kentucky ruling chips away at ban" by Matt Pearce, Los Angeles Times 2/12/14
District Judge John G. Heyburn ordered that Kentucky recognize same-sex marriages that had been legally performed in other states and opened the door wide for activists to strike down Kentucky's ban entirely.
"For years, many states had a tradition of segregation and even articulated reasons why it created a better, more stable society," Heyburn wrote, in what may likely become one of the most frequently-quoted passages of his decision. "Similarly, many states deprived women of their equal rights under the law, believing this to properly preserve our traditions.
"In time, even the most strident supporters of these views understood that they could not enforce their particular moral views to the detriment of another's constitutional rights. Here as well, sometime in the not too distant future, the same understanding will come to pass."
It wasn't immediately clear how Heyburn's ruling will be received in deeply conservative Kentucky, whose voters approved a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in 2004 with 74% of the vote.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Kentucky gay marriage: Judge says state must recognize gay marriages performed in other states" by The Associated Press 2/13/14
[Judge Heyburn] mainly relied on the U.S. Supreme Court's 2013 ruling striking down a section of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, on which Kentucky's same-sex marriage amendment had been based.
It was unclear Wednesday evening if the state would appeal the decision to the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, which has never been asked to directly rule on whether a state must recognize a same-sex marriage from another state.
Attorney General Jack Conway said he upheld his duty to defend the law, but deferred any further comment because a final order had not been issued in the case.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs are hoping the decision opens the door to more breakthroughs, including requiring Kentucky to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Attorney Shannon Fauver, who represented the [homosexual] couples, said such a lawsuit could be filed in Kentucky by Friday — on Valentine's Day.
"That's what the Constitution is for," Fauver told The Associated Press. "That's part of what the Constitution is for, to prevent someone from imposing religious beliefs and traditions on others."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
