Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin has ordered the Oklahoma Health Care Authority to terminate further payments to the state's Planned Parenthood clinics because their "consistent submission of improper billings should disqualify these Planned Parenthood providers from participation in the Oklahoma Medicaid program."
For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:
Taxpayers' $Billions to Abortionists: Government Report
Federal Government Probes Planned Parenthood for Fraud
Planned Parenthood's Goal is to Defraud Taxpayers
Planned Parenthood Faces $5.5 Billion (with a "B") Fine for Fraud
Also read Planned Parenthood Reports its Abortions & Profits Increased Last Year
And read Planned Parenthood Caught Selling Aborted Babies on Video
-- From "Oklahoma Governor Seeks End of Planned Parenthood Contracts" by Tim Talley, Associated Press 11/19/15
The governor announced Thursday that she's asking the Oklahoma Health Care Authority to terminate contracts with Planned Parenthood of Central Oklahoma in Oklahoma City and Planned Parenthood of the Heartland in Tulsa.
Fallin said the authority reviewed payments to the two affiliates and found billing error rates of about 20 percent for Oklahoma City and 14 percent for Tulsa, though no improper use of state Medicaid funds was discovered.
"These results are alarming," the two-term Republican governor said in a letter to Nico Gomez, CEO of the authority. "More than one in every seven bills submitted for payment to your agency by these providers are inaccurately coded or insufficiently documented. These errors result in overbilling to the Oklahoma taxpayer."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oklahoma looks to defund Planned Parenthood for 'billing errors'" by Sarah Ferris, The Hill 11/19/15
Fallin asked Oklahoma's health department on Thursday to terminate its contracts with the group after an official review of the state’s two affiliates found billing error rates of 20 and 14 percent.
Oklahoma reimbursed Planned Parenthood for about $100,000 worth of claims in 2015, totaling about 20,000 patient visits. In 2014, the state paid $200,000 for about 36,000 patient visits.
The move would impact six clinics in and around Oklahoma City and Tulsa.
Fallin argued that ending the Medicaid contracts — which would force the clinics to accept fewer patients if not close altogether — would not impact a woman’s ability to choose her own provider, citing 120 other healthcare providers in the state.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "De-Funding Planned Parenthood After It’s Caught Engaging in Fraud" by Micaiah Bilger, LifeNews.com 11/20/15
“There are only two Planned Parenthood affiliates in the state operating in about six metropolitan locations in Oklahoma City and Tulsa,” according to [Fallin's] letter. “However, there are more than 120 other metropolitan and rural providers available … all of whom provide a broader spectrum of health care services than Planned Parenthood’s limited metropolitan locations.”
The Alliance Defending Freedom, which has been involved in several lawsuits alleging that Planned Parenthood affiliates overbilled Medicaid, praised Fallin’s actions Thursday in a press release.
“Governor Fallin is right to recognize that taxpayer money should go to fund local community health centers, not to subsidize a scandal-ridden, billion-dollar abortion business,” said ADF Legal Counsel Kellie Fiedorek. “Oklahomans shouldn’t be forced to give their money to Planned Parenthood, which has a long track record of abusive and potentially fraudulent billing practices, not to mention that it has also been caught in authenticated undercover videos trafficking aborted babies’ body parts and has repeatedly failed to report the sexual abuse of girls. That tax money should be redirected to trusted health care providers.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Gov. Mary Fallin requests termination of Planned Parenthood contracts in Oklahoma" posted at KOCO-TV5 (Oklahoma City, OK) 11/19/15
[Gov. Fallin] also requested ending contracts with similar providers found to have a high billing error rate, have had past findings of over-billing or associate with other providers who do not adhere to the standards that are required to be granted access to public funds.
According to the news release, the state paid the two Planned Parenthood affiliates $100,145 for almost 20,000 claims in 2015, with the total payment being slightly more than $1 million because the majority of Planned Parenthood services qualify for a 90 percent federal match. Last year, Oklahoma paid $204,631 for more than 35,000 claims, making the federal matching funds slightly more than $2 million.
“We have a joint responsibility to the citizens in Oklahoma to hold providers to high standards that are imposed to allow an entity to receive taxpayer dollars,” Fallin wrote. “The recent behavior of the Planned Parenthood affiliates clearly demonstrates that these providers do not value the opportunity to serve their fellow Oklahomans with taxpayer funds. Indeed whether willful or simply negligent, the consistent submission of improper billings should disqualify these Planned Parenthood providers from participation in the Oklahoma Medicaid program.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read how Planned Parenthood teams up with schools by providing "kinky sex trainers" for kids.
Showing posts with label OK. Show all posts
Showing posts with label OK. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 24, 2015
Wednesday, September 16, 2015
Baptist, ACLU Force Ten Commandments Demo in Okla.
On June 30, 2015, the Oklahoma Supreme Court agreed with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Oklahoma, and its lead plaintiff Rev. Bruce Prescott, that the Ten Commandments on display near the state Capitol since 2012 violates the state constitution. Last week, District Judge Thomas Prince ordered the privately funded $10,000 monument, authorized by the Legislature in 2009, be removed by October 12.
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
Federal Judge Allows Ten Commandments in Ohio Display
Ten Commandments Returns to Kentucky Courthouse after Appeal Win
Kentucky School Dumps Ten Commandments as Atheist Demand
Virginia School Compromises with ACLU for Ten Commandments Display
Pennsylvania Atheists Sue to Remove Ten Commandments from Church Land
-- From "Judge orders Ten Commandments monument removed" by Tim Talley, Associated Press 9/12/15
The American Civil Liberties Union sued the state in 2013 on behalf of the Rev. Bruce Prescott, a Baptist minister in Norman, and others who argued that the monument’s location violated the Oklahoma Constitution’s ban against using public property to support “any sect, church, denomination or system of religion.”
Prince initially sided with the state, ruling last year that the privately funded monument could remain on the Capitol grounds. Pruitt’s office argued that the statue was permitted because of the historical significance of the text.
But in a 7-2 ruling, the Oklahoma Supreme Court said the monument was a religious symbol and violated the state constitution. The high court reaffirmed its ruling in July, when it denied a rehearing sought by Pruitt’s office.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Judge gives Oklahoma a month to remove Ten Commandments from Capitol" by Heide Brandes, Reuters 9/11/15
District Judge Thomas Prince denied a motion from Attorney General Scott Pruitt to keep in place the monument that had been on Capitol grounds since 2012 and garnered strong support from Oklahoma's Republican leadership.
The decision prompted Republican lawmakers to say they will look at impeachment for the [Supreme Court] justices who made the decision and legal briefs from the attorney general's office to keep the monument in the shadow of the Statehouse.
Lawmakers have argued that the monument was not serving a religious purpose but was meant to mark a historical event.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Judge orders removal of Ten Commandments monument" by Bob Allen, Baptist News Global 9/15/15
Bruce Prescott, an ordained Baptist minister and former executive director of Mainstream Oklahoma Baptists, sued the state in 2013 seeking removal of a 6-foot-tall stone monument authorized by state lawmakers in 2009.
On July 27 the high court denied a request for rehearing by Attorney General Scott Pruitt. Pruitt then filed a brief with Oklahoma County Judge Thomas Prince, asking the trial judge to consider if the state Supreme Court ruling "creates hostility toward religion that violates the U.S. Constitution."
The state Supreme Court refused to apply a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court upholding the placement of a similar monument on the Texas Capitol grounds, finding the issue lies with the Oklahoma constitution rather than the federal Bill of Rights.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that as a historical monument the Texas Ten Commandments display served a secular purpose. Prescott said in his lawsuit that as a Christian, he regards the Ten Commandments as religious doctrine and that attempts to co-opt them amounted to “a cheapening and denigration” of his faith.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Last Round in 10 Commandments Fight?" by David Lee, Courthouse News Service 9/14/15
The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled on June 30 that the privately funded monument violates the Oklahoma Constitution prohibition of using public money or property for any church, denomination, religious leader or sectarian institution.
"The issue in the case at hand is whether the Oklahoma Ten Commandments monument violates the Oklahoma Constitution, not whether it violates the Establishment Clause," the per curiam opinion stated. "Our opinion rests solely on the Oklahoma Constitution with no regard for federal jurisprudence. As concerns the 'historic purpose' justification, the Ten Commandments are obviously religious in nature and are an integral part of the Jewish and Christian faiths."
The Oklahoma Supreme Court denied Attorney General Scott Pruitt's request for a rehearing on July 27.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oklahoma judge orders Ten Commandments monument be removed from Capitol grounds in 30 days" by Kyle Schwab, The Oklahoman 9/11/15
The Capitol Preservation Commission has 30 days to remove the religious monument from the Capitol grounds.
District Judge Thomas Prince chose to follow the June 30 Oklahoma Supreme Court decision to remove the monument. The Supreme Court found the monument was a religious symbol and violated the state constitutional ban on using public property for “the benefit of any religious purpose.”
In a statement released after the ruling, Attorney General Scott Pruitt said he wants voters to have the chance to “rectify this problem” by voting to remove the section from the state Constitution.
To read the entire article above (with links to the complete news saga), CLICK HERE.
"The Constitution forbids states from banning all religion from public spaces, and from making churches the ghettos of religion where all manifestations of faith are kept separate from public life."For background, read Atheists' Oklahoma Lawsuit vs. Ten Commandments Tossed by Federal Judge and also read Satan on Throne at Oklahoma Capitol with ACLU Help
-- Attorney General Scott Pruitt
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
Federal Judge Allows Ten Commandments in Ohio Display
Ten Commandments Returns to Kentucky Courthouse after Appeal Win
Kentucky School Dumps Ten Commandments as Atheist Demand
Virginia School Compromises with ACLU for Ten Commandments Display
Pennsylvania Atheists Sue to Remove Ten Commandments from Church Land
-- From "Judge orders Ten Commandments monument removed" by Tim Talley, Associated Press 9/12/15
The American Civil Liberties Union sued the state in 2013 on behalf of the Rev. Bruce Prescott, a Baptist minister in Norman, and others who argued that the monument’s location violated the Oklahoma Constitution’s ban against using public property to support “any sect, church, denomination or system of religion.”
Prince initially sided with the state, ruling last year that the privately funded monument could remain on the Capitol grounds. Pruitt’s office argued that the statue was permitted because of the historical significance of the text.
But in a 7-2 ruling, the Oklahoma Supreme Court said the monument was a religious symbol and violated the state constitution. The high court reaffirmed its ruling in July, when it denied a rehearing sought by Pruitt’s office.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Judge gives Oklahoma a month to remove Ten Commandments from Capitol" by Heide Brandes, Reuters 9/11/15
District Judge Thomas Prince denied a motion from Attorney General Scott Pruitt to keep in place the monument that had been on Capitol grounds since 2012 and garnered strong support from Oklahoma's Republican leadership.
The decision prompted Republican lawmakers to say they will look at impeachment for the [Supreme Court] justices who made the decision and legal briefs from the attorney general's office to keep the monument in the shadow of the Statehouse.
Lawmakers have argued that the monument was not serving a religious purpose but was meant to mark a historical event.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Judge orders removal of Ten Commandments monument" by Bob Allen, Baptist News Global 9/15/15
Bruce Prescott, an ordained Baptist minister and former executive director of Mainstream Oklahoma Baptists, sued the state in 2013 seeking removal of a 6-foot-tall stone monument authorized by state lawmakers in 2009.
On July 27 the high court denied a request for rehearing by Attorney General Scott Pruitt. Pruitt then filed a brief with Oklahoma County Judge Thomas Prince, asking the trial judge to consider if the state Supreme Court ruling "creates hostility toward religion that violates the U.S. Constitution."
The state Supreme Court refused to apply a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court upholding the placement of a similar monument on the Texas Capitol grounds, finding the issue lies with the Oklahoma constitution rather than the federal Bill of Rights.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that as a historical monument the Texas Ten Commandments display served a secular purpose. Prescott said in his lawsuit that as a Christian, he regards the Ten Commandments as religious doctrine and that attempts to co-opt them amounted to “a cheapening and denigration” of his faith.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Last Round in 10 Commandments Fight?" by David Lee, Courthouse News Service 9/14/15
The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled on June 30 that the privately funded monument violates the Oklahoma Constitution prohibition of using public money or property for any church, denomination, religious leader or sectarian institution.
"The issue in the case at hand is whether the Oklahoma Ten Commandments monument violates the Oklahoma Constitution, not whether it violates the Establishment Clause," the per curiam opinion stated. "Our opinion rests solely on the Oklahoma Constitution with no regard for federal jurisprudence. As concerns the 'historic purpose' justification, the Ten Commandments are obviously religious in nature and are an integral part of the Jewish and Christian faiths."
The Oklahoma Supreme Court denied Attorney General Scott Pruitt's request for a rehearing on July 27.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oklahoma judge orders Ten Commandments monument be removed from Capitol grounds in 30 days" by Kyle Schwab, The Oklahoman 9/11/15
The Capitol Preservation Commission has 30 days to remove the religious monument from the Capitol grounds.
District Judge Thomas Prince chose to follow the June 30 Oklahoma Supreme Court decision to remove the monument. The Supreme Court found the monument was a religious symbol and violated the state constitutional ban on using public property for “the benefit of any religious purpose.”
In a statement released after the ruling, Attorney General Scott Pruitt said he wants voters to have the chance to “rectify this problem” by voting to remove the section from the state Constitution.
To read the entire article above (with links to the complete news saga), CLICK HERE.
Wednesday, April 15, 2015
Abortionists Stymied by New Oklahoma & Kansas Laws
Whereas abortion advocates routinely challenge virtually every new state law limiting abortion, they appear starkly hesitant to sue to block first-of-a-kind second trimester pro-life laws enacted this month in Kansas and Oklahoma. Apparently abortionists are reticent to defend, publicly in court, the gruesome D&E procedure wherein the unborn baby dies as he/she is literally torn limb-from-limb.
For background, read Illegal to Rip Babies Limb From Limb in Kansas, New Law
-- From "Oklahoma Governor Signs Measure Banning Abortion Procedure" by The Associated Press 4/13/15
Oklahoma has become the second state to ban a common second-trimester abortion procedure that critics describe as dismembering a fetus.
Republican Gov. Mary Fallin signed the legislation Monday after it was overwhelmingly approved by the House and Senate.
The abortion measure prohibits doctors from using forceps, clamps, scissors or similar instruments on a live fetus to remove it from the womb in pieces. Such instruments are used in dilation and evacuation [D&E] procedures performed in the second trimester.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Doctors condemn Oklahoma banning ‘safest’ abortion practice" by Payton Guion in New York, UK Independent 4/14/15
“With this law, Oklahoma has joined Kansas in an alarming trend toward substituting politicians’ agendas for the judgment and expertise of doctors, and then threatening those doctors with criminal charges if they disagree,” Nancy Northup, CEO of the Centre for Reproductive Rights, said in a statement.
Twenty two doctors sent a letter to Steve Brunk, the chairman of the House Federal and State Affairs committee warning the state government about the implications of the law.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Kansas Limits Abortion Method, Opening a New Line of Attack" by Erik Eckholm and Frances Robles, New York Times 4/7/15
In the procedure, the cervix is dilated with medication and the fetus is removed with forceps, often in parts. With a new legal approach intended to highlight what for many are uncomfortable aspects of abortions, groups like National Right to Life hope to expand their efforts.
“The Unborn Child Protection From Dismemberment Abortion Act is the first of what we hope will be many state laws banning dismemberment abortions,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “This law has the power to transform the landscape of abortion policy in the United States.”
“The law raises very grave constitutional concerns,” said Janet Crepps, a lawyer with the Center for Reproductive Rights in New York.
It might also be possible, some experts said, for doctors to comply with the law by killing the fetus with an injection of the heart drug digoxin before starting a dilation and evacuation procedure. This is commonly done in very late abortions, after perhaps 18 weeks, but not earlier because, experts say, it seems unnecessary and adds uncertainties to the procedure.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oklahoma Governor Signs Bill to Ban Dismemberment Abortions Tearing Babies Limb From Limb" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 4/14/15
[Gov.] Fallin issued a statement Monday afternoon: “HB 1721 is an important pro-life measure that outlaws gruesome mid-term abortions. I am proud to sign a law that will strengthen protections for unborn children in Oklahoma.”
Rep. Pam Peterson, R-Tulsa, and Sen. Josh Brecheen, R-Coalgate, sponsored the bill and thanked Governor Fallin.
Brecheen said: “I am more than pleased with the passage and signature on the bill. In the last 15 years, over 1,500 unborn children in Oklahoma were aborted through the dismemberment procedure.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oklahoma becomes second state to ban dismemberment abortions" Ben Johnson, LifeSiteNews.com 4/14/15
The bill, which takes effect on November 1, passed the state legislature by lopsided majorities, clearing the state House of Representatives 84-2 in February, and the state Senate last week by a 37-4 margin.
D&E abortion accounts for approximately 96 percent of all second trimester abortions, according to the National Abortion Federation – an estimated 100,000 abortions a year.
“So, yes, a dismemberment ban would stop many babies from being aborted,” pro-life newshound Jill Stanek wrote. But she adds that the educational value may be more important yet, since it was during the time that bills banning partial birth abortion were “introduced throughout the states and federally during the 1990s that public opinion began to change on abortion.”
Dr. Anthony Levatino, a former abortionist, graphically described D&E abortions on the floor of the House of Representatives in 2012, from removing each part of the body at the joint to finally decapitating the child and extracting the skull and body fragments. “Many times a little face may come out and stare back at you,” he said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Abortion Rates Plunge: Liberals Fume, Call for More Access
But, according to a new Gallup poll, Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
For background, read Illegal to Rip Babies Limb From Limb in Kansas, New Law
-- From "Oklahoma Governor Signs Measure Banning Abortion Procedure" by The Associated Press 4/13/15
Oklahoma has become the second state to ban a common second-trimester abortion procedure that critics describe as dismembering a fetus.
Republican Gov. Mary Fallin signed the legislation Monday after it was overwhelmingly approved by the House and Senate.
The abortion measure prohibits doctors from using forceps, clamps, scissors or similar instruments on a live fetus to remove it from the womb in pieces. Such instruments are used in dilation and evacuation [D&E] procedures performed in the second trimester.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Doctors condemn Oklahoma banning ‘safest’ abortion practice" by Payton Guion in New York, UK Independent 4/14/15
“With this law, Oklahoma has joined Kansas in an alarming trend toward substituting politicians’ agendas for the judgment and expertise of doctors, and then threatening those doctors with criminal charges if they disagree,” Nancy Northup, CEO of the Centre for Reproductive Rights, said in a statement.
Twenty two doctors sent a letter to Steve Brunk, the chairman of the House Federal and State Affairs committee warning the state government about the implications of the law.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Kansas Limits Abortion Method, Opening a New Line of Attack" by Erik Eckholm and Frances Robles, New York Times 4/7/15
In the procedure, the cervix is dilated with medication and the fetus is removed with forceps, often in parts. With a new legal approach intended to highlight what for many are uncomfortable aspects of abortions, groups like National Right to Life hope to expand their efforts.
“The Unborn Child Protection From Dismemberment Abortion Act is the first of what we hope will be many state laws banning dismemberment abortions,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “This law has the power to transform the landscape of abortion policy in the United States.”
“The law raises very grave constitutional concerns,” said Janet Crepps, a lawyer with the Center for Reproductive Rights in New York.
It might also be possible, some experts said, for doctors to comply with the law by killing the fetus with an injection of the heart drug digoxin before starting a dilation and evacuation procedure. This is commonly done in very late abortions, after perhaps 18 weeks, but not earlier because, experts say, it seems unnecessary and adds uncertainties to the procedure.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oklahoma Governor Signs Bill to Ban Dismemberment Abortions Tearing Babies Limb From Limb" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 4/14/15
[Gov.] Fallin issued a statement Monday afternoon: “HB 1721 is an important pro-life measure that outlaws gruesome mid-term abortions. I am proud to sign a law that will strengthen protections for unborn children in Oklahoma.”
Rep. Pam Peterson, R-Tulsa, and Sen. Josh Brecheen, R-Coalgate, sponsored the bill and thanked Governor Fallin.
Brecheen said: “I am more than pleased with the passage and signature on the bill. In the last 15 years, over 1,500 unborn children in Oklahoma were aborted through the dismemberment procedure.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oklahoma becomes second state to ban dismemberment abortions" Ben Johnson, LifeSiteNews.com 4/14/15
The bill, which takes effect on November 1, passed the state legislature by lopsided majorities, clearing the state House of Representatives 84-2 in February, and the state Senate last week by a 37-4 margin.
D&E abortion accounts for approximately 96 percent of all second trimester abortions, according to the National Abortion Federation – an estimated 100,000 abortions a year.
“So, yes, a dismemberment ban would stop many babies from being aborted,” pro-life newshound Jill Stanek wrote. But she adds that the educational value may be more important yet, since it was during the time that bills banning partial birth abortion were “introduced throughout the states and federally during the 1990s that public opinion began to change on abortion.”
Dr. Anthony Levatino, a former abortionist, graphically described D&E abortions on the floor of the House of Representatives in 2012, from removing each part of the body at the joint to finally decapitating the child and extracting the skull and body fragments. “Many times a little face may come out and stare back at you,” he said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Abortion Rates Plunge: Liberals Fume, Call for More Access
But, according to a new Gallup poll, Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
Wednesday, March 18, 2015
Atheists' Oklahoma Lawsuit Tossed by Federal Judge
A federal district judge dismissed a lawsuit by New Jersey-based American Atheists Inc. demanding a privately-funded Ten Commandments monument near the Oklahoma Capitol be removed. The ruling stated that atheists who travel America in search of opportunities to "be offended" don't have legal standing.
For background, read Satan on Throne at Oklahoma Capitol with ACLU Help
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
Atheists from Wisconsin Want Christians Out of Oklahoma Schools
Atheists Sue to Remove Ten Commandments from Church Land in Pennsylvania
Atheists Defeat Veterans Memorial in North Carolina
Atheists Force Bible Bans at Colleges Across America
Federal Judge Allows Ten Commandments in Ohio Display
Ten Commandments Returns to Kentucky Courthouse after Appeal Win
-- From "Judge Dismisses Suit Over Oklahoma Ten Commandments Monument" by Tim Talley, Associated Press 3/10/15
An attorney for the [atheist] group, Eric O. Husby of Tampa, Florida, said he disagrees with the ruling but that no decision has been made to appeal.
Cauthron's decision was hailed by Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, whose office defended the monument.
"The historical relevance of the Ten Commandments and the role it played in the founding of our nation cannot be disputed," Pruitt said in a statement.
It's the second time that Pruitt's office has successfully defended the monument against constitutional challenges. In September, Oklahoma County District Judge Thomas Prince ruled that the monument does not violate the state constitution and can remain. The ruling has been appealed to the Oklahoma Supreme Court [by the American Civil Liberties Union of Oklahoma].
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "U.S. judge allows Ten Commandments to remain at Oklahoma Capitol" by Heide Brandes, Reuters 3/10/15
The 6-foot-tall stone monument, paid for with private money and supported by lawmakers in the socially conservative state, was first installed in 2012, prompting complaints that it violated the U.S. Constitution's provisions against government establishment of religion.
"The Court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to establish standing and therefore the Court lacks jurisdiction to decide this action," U.S. District Judge Robin Cauthron wrote.
Defendants argued that the suit filed by New Jersey-based American Atheists Inc failed to show that the group had been injured by the installation of the monument.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Federal Judge Dismisses Atheists’ Ten Commandments Lawsuit In Oklahoma" by Matt Dinger, The Oklahoman 3/11/15
The defendants in the case, the members of the State Capitol Preservation Commission and others involved with the monument, argued that [Aimee Breeze] who complained about the monument saw it only once in April and that the sole purpose of her visit was to be offended by it.
State Rep. Mike Ritze, R-Broken Arrow, paid for the monument.
“I am very pleased that this case was dismissed, and that Oklahomans can continue to enjoy the monument and understand the Ten Commandments historical significance to our nation,” Ritze said.
“I doubt that this is the last challenge we will face, but we will continue to fight to have the monument preserved at our state Capitol.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Atheists Lack Standing in Oklahoma" by David Lee, Courthouse News Service, 3/11/15
". . . the location of the monument in relation to the Capitol building and plaintiff Breeze's use of that building would require her to walk around the Capitol to find the monument," the 6-page opinion states.
Breeze failed to establish the type of personal contact with the monument sufficient to show the "direct injury required for standing," Cauthron wrote.
The Plano, Texas-based Liberty Institute and Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt defended government officials in [this] case.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read President Obama Provokes Second 'In God We Trust' Movement
". . . plaintiff does not have a 'special license to roam the country in search of governmental wrongdoing.'"UPDATE 9/16/15: Baptist, ACLU Force Removal of Ten Commandments at Oklahoma Capitol
-- U.S. District Judge Robin Cauthron
For background, read Satan on Throne at Oklahoma Capitol with ACLU Help
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
Atheists from Wisconsin Want Christians Out of Oklahoma Schools
Atheists Sue to Remove Ten Commandments from Church Land in Pennsylvania
Atheists Defeat Veterans Memorial in North Carolina
Atheists Force Bible Bans at Colleges Across America
Federal Judge Allows Ten Commandments in Ohio Display
Ten Commandments Returns to Kentucky Courthouse after Appeal Win
-- From "Judge Dismisses Suit Over Oklahoma Ten Commandments Monument" by Tim Talley, Associated Press 3/10/15
An attorney for the [atheist] group, Eric O. Husby of Tampa, Florida, said he disagrees with the ruling but that no decision has been made to appeal.
Cauthron's decision was hailed by Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, whose office defended the monument.
"The historical relevance of the Ten Commandments and the role it played in the founding of our nation cannot be disputed," Pruitt said in a statement.
It's the second time that Pruitt's office has successfully defended the monument against constitutional challenges. In September, Oklahoma County District Judge Thomas Prince ruled that the monument does not violate the state constitution and can remain. The ruling has been appealed to the Oklahoma Supreme Court [by the American Civil Liberties Union of Oklahoma].
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "U.S. judge allows Ten Commandments to remain at Oklahoma Capitol" by Heide Brandes, Reuters 3/10/15
The 6-foot-tall stone monument, paid for with private money and supported by lawmakers in the socially conservative state, was first installed in 2012, prompting complaints that it violated the U.S. Constitution's provisions against government establishment of religion.
"The Court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to establish standing and therefore the Court lacks jurisdiction to decide this action," U.S. District Judge Robin Cauthron wrote.
Defendants argued that the suit filed by New Jersey-based American Atheists Inc failed to show that the group had been injured by the installation of the monument.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Federal Judge Dismisses Atheists’ Ten Commandments Lawsuit In Oklahoma" by Matt Dinger, The Oklahoman 3/11/15
The defendants in the case, the members of the State Capitol Preservation Commission and others involved with the monument, argued that [Aimee Breeze] who complained about the monument saw it only once in April and that the sole purpose of her visit was to be offended by it.
State Rep. Mike Ritze, R-Broken Arrow, paid for the monument.
“I am very pleased that this case was dismissed, and that Oklahomans can continue to enjoy the monument and understand the Ten Commandments historical significance to our nation,” Ritze said.
“I doubt that this is the last challenge we will face, but we will continue to fight to have the monument preserved at our state Capitol.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Atheists Lack Standing in Oklahoma" by David Lee, Courthouse News Service, 3/11/15
". . . the location of the monument in relation to the Capitol building and plaintiff Breeze's use of that building would require her to walk around the Capitol to find the monument," the 6-page opinion states.
Breeze failed to establish the type of personal contact with the monument sufficient to show the "direct injury required for standing," Cauthron wrote.
The Plano, Texas-based Liberty Institute and Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt defended government officials in [this] case.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read President Obama Provokes Second 'In God We Trust' Movement
Sunday, February 22, 2015
Wisc. Atheists Want Christians Out of Okla. Schools
The Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) has been, as always, sending threatening letters to dozens of Oklahoma public schools demanding that Christians have no business talking about Jesus or being in possession of Bibles anywhere near school children. However, where are these same atheists as myriad public schools across America indoctrinate students with non-Christian religion?
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
'God Bless America' Banned from Florida School
California School Bans Books by Christian Authors
Florida School Teaches Islam Including Prayer Rugs
Colorado School Visits Mosque, Enforces Sharia Law for Girls' Dress
Massachusetts Students Forced To Learn Muslim Conversion
Pseudo Prayer Mandatory at School in San Francisco
California Judge OKs Teaching Hinduism in Public School
-- From "Bible distribution at Oklahoma public schools leads to complaint from Wisconsin-based group" by The Associated Press 2/17/15
The Oklahoman reports that the Wisconsin-based Freedom from Religion Foundation sent letters to 26 school districts after they were informed that Gideon's International and the son of a state representative had been distributing bibles to fifth-grade students in Checotah, Eufaula and Stidham.
Someone complained to the foundation after seeing a Facebook post by Jamison Faught [age 26] that he and fellow members of Gideon's International had spent a morning passing out bibles to students.
Jamison Faught's father, Rep. George Faught, R-Muskogee, said that he supports his son's efforts.
"Passing out the scriptures — you certainly can't be blamed for that," Rep. Faught said. "What happens is, this group has used scare tactics ... The great thing about Oklahoma is that I've been at a lot of school activities where, at least in our area, we still pray before football games. We still — some people pray before meetings and certainly honor our God-given rights."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Bible distribution at some Oklahoma public schools prompts group's complaint" by Randy Ellis, The Oklahoman 2/16/15
“Last several years, we’ve been able to do it at every school in McIntosh, Okmulgee and Okfuskee counties except one or two,” Jamison Faught wrote on Facebook. “Last year, the Checotah principal not only personally took us to each classroom, but he helped us hand them out!”
“These allegations, if true, violate the Constitution and breach the trust between the District and parents,” Seidel wrote in a letter to Janet Blocker, superintendent of Checotah Public Schools.
Seidel said his organization has not filed a lawsuit against Oklahoma schools over the issue yet and he hopes it doesn’t come to that.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Court Orders Oklahoma Christian Cop to Mosque, Accept Koran
"You have this Evangelical group going out [to schools] and forcing their religion upon these children — it's incredibly predatory and dangerous."For background, read Oklahoma School Challenges Atheists' Lawsuit Threat
-- Andrew Seidel, Attorney Freedom From Religion Foundation (from KOCO-TV5 Oklahoma City)
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
'God Bless America' Banned from Florida School
California School Bans Books by Christian Authors
Florida School Teaches Islam Including Prayer Rugs
Colorado School Visits Mosque, Enforces Sharia Law for Girls' Dress
Massachusetts Students Forced To Learn Muslim Conversion
Pseudo Prayer Mandatory at School in San Francisco
California Judge OKs Teaching Hinduism in Public School
-- From "Bible distribution at Oklahoma public schools leads to complaint from Wisconsin-based group" by The Associated Press 2/17/15
The Oklahoman reports that the Wisconsin-based Freedom from Religion Foundation sent letters to 26 school districts after they were informed that Gideon's International and the son of a state representative had been distributing bibles to fifth-grade students in Checotah, Eufaula and Stidham.
Someone complained to the foundation after seeing a Facebook post by Jamison Faught [age 26] that he and fellow members of Gideon's International had spent a morning passing out bibles to students.
Jamison Faught's father, Rep. George Faught, R-Muskogee, said that he supports his son's efforts.
"Passing out the scriptures — you certainly can't be blamed for that," Rep. Faught said. "What happens is, this group has used scare tactics ... The great thing about Oklahoma is that I've been at a lot of school activities where, at least in our area, we still pray before football games. We still — some people pray before meetings and certainly honor our God-given rights."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Bible distribution at some Oklahoma public schools prompts group's complaint" by Randy Ellis, The Oklahoman 2/16/15
“Last several years, we’ve been able to do it at every school in McIntosh, Okmulgee and Okfuskee counties except one or two,” Jamison Faught wrote on Facebook. “Last year, the Checotah principal not only personally took us to each classroom, but he helped us hand them out!”
“These allegations, if true, violate the Constitution and breach the trust between the District and parents,” Seidel wrote in a letter to Janet Blocker, superintendent of Checotah Public Schools.
Seidel said his organization has not filed a lawsuit against Oklahoma schools over the issue yet and he hopes it doesn’t come to that.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Court Orders Oklahoma Christian Cop to Mosque, Accept Koran
Thursday, January 29, 2015
Ala. Supreme Says Ignore Fed. Court—'Gay Marriage'
In a letter to Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley, Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore provided his legal review of U.S. District Judge Callie V.S."Ginny" Granade's ruling that the one-man-one-woman marriage amendment to the Alabama Constitution (passed by 81% of the state's voters in 2006) violated the U.S. Constitution. Justice Moore advised Gov. Bentley that state courts need NOT abide by Judge Granade's ruling because it violates the state’s constitution — only such a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court would be valid; therefore, probate judges are NOT to begin issuing same-sex "marriage" licenses.
UPDATE 3/6/15: Alabama Supreme Court Halts ALL Same-sex "Marriages" (see excerpts below)
UPDATE 10/7/15: 'Gay Marriage' Stopped in Alabama by Judges
For background, read 'Gay Marriage' Loses in Federal Court, on to Supreme Court
Also read the increasing number of court rulings AGAINST the redefinition of marriage.
And read 'Gay Marriage' Not Favored in Polls, Only in Court
From "Alabama Supreme Court Justice calls same-sex marriage ruling 'tyranny'" by Matt Bradwell, UPI 1/28/15
In the letter [to Gov. Bentley], Moore claims the District Court's ruling "raised serious, legitimate concerns about the propriety of federal court jurisdiction" and he even goes as far as to assert the ruling was an "unlawful opinion" and act of "tyranny."
On Friday, U.S. District Judge Ginny Granade ruled Alabama's law banning same-sex marriage was unconstitutional and actually harmed the children its supporters attempted to frame their defense around.
Within a day of sending the letter to Bentley, civil rights group The Southern Poverty Law Center [SPLC] filed an ethics complaint against Moore with the Judicial Inquiry Commission of Alabama.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore says federal judge's ruling on gay marriage not binding" by Mike Cason, The Birmingham News 1/28/15
Moore said his letter to the governor was not public comment on the case. He said as chief justice he is also the top administrator of the state court system.
"My duty as chief justice and administrative head of the court system is to enlighten those courts under my authority as to what the law is in this matter," Moore said.
"And the law is clearly that federal district courts and appellate courts are only persuasive authority to the courts of this state because the judges of state courts are equally competent to interpret federal law."
"Many states have just caved to it," Moore said. "They absolutely have. When a federal district judge rules, that's it. But they didn't have to.
"And I'm saying we don't have to. And it's in accordance with the law. It's not defiance."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore Threatens To Defy 'Tyranny' Of Federal Courts On Gay Marriage" by Ryan J. Reilly, Huffington Post 1/27/15
Moore's letter to Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley (R) came a few days after a federal judge in the state ruled that Alabama's same-sex marriage ban violates the constitutional rights of gay citizens. The ruling in Alabama is currently stayed for two weeks to allow the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to decide whether the marriages should continue to be delayed until the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments on the constitutionality of state same-sex marriage bans later this year.
While he didn't spell out exactly how he planned to defy the ruling of a federal court, Moore said he would "continue to recognize the Alabama Constitution," which has an amendment that bans same-sex marriage. Moore also pointed out rulings from the Supreme Court of Alabama -- from 1870 and 1904 -- that called marriage a "divine institution" and a "sacred relation."
Moore even quoted a U.S. Supreme Court ruling from 1885 (which was later quoted in a 1908 Supreme Court case) that he said indicated the court recognized the importance of marriage and family. He said the "destruction of that institution is upon us by federal courts using specious pretexts based on the Equal Protection, Due Process, and Full Faith and Credit Clauses" of the Constitution. He said that 44 federal courts have "imposed by judicial fiat same-sex marriages in 21 states of the union."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Chief Justice of Alabama Supreme Court Against Gay Marriage" posted at JD Journal 1/28/15
In the letter, Moore wrote, “I am dismayed by those judges in our state who have stated they will recognize and unilaterally enforce a federal court decision which does not bind them. I would advise them that the issuance of such licenses would be in defiance of the laws and constitution of Alabama.”
A constitutional law expert from the University of Alabama School of Law, Ronald Krotoszynski, said that the letter from Moore will carry very little weight. The reason for this is that federal constitutional law overrides that of the individual state constitutions.
“There is no credible legal argument that an order from a federal judge with jurisdiction over a matter isn’t binding on a state government,” he said.
Governor Bentley has said that he is in support of the state’s gay marriage ban and will fight to uphold it.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore says he will continue to recognize ban on same-sex marriage" by Mike Cason, The Birmingham News 1/27/15
[Gov.] Bentley issued a statement today after Moore's letter was released.
"The people of Alabama elected me to uphold our state Constitution, and when I took the oath of office last week, that is what I promised to do," the governor said.
"The people of Alabama voted in a constitutional amendment to define marriage as being between man and woman. As governor, I must uphold the Constitution. I am disappointed in Friday's ruling, and I will continue to oppose this ruling. The Federal government must not infringe on the rights of states."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore Defies Federal Court on Gay Marriage; SPLC Files Ethics Complaint" by Michael Gryboski, Christian Post Reporter 1/29/15
Alabama's government has opted to continue defending the constitutional amendment, filing a request to grant a stay until the US Supreme Court renders a decision on the matter.
Some observers, reported Fox News, believe that the ruling, even if it takes effect, may have a more limited scope than assumed.
"The Alabama Probate Judges' Association maintains that Friday's ruling applies only to the parties in that case, and that it doesn't require judges to issue marriage licenses to other same-sex couples," noted Fox [News].
Filed Wednesday, the SPLC's complaint was brought before the Judicial Inquiry Commission of Alabama and alleged that "Moore's actions violate Alabama's Canons of Judicial Ethics in numerous and significant regards."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Roy Moore denounces same-sex marriage ruling" by Brian Lyman, Montgomery Advertiser 1/27/15
. . . Rep. Patricia Todd, Alabama's only openly gay legislator, threatened to reveal which "pro-family value" politicians were having extramarital affairs if they continued criticizing gay marriage as immoral.
"I'm sick of the hypocrisy. If you start disparaging my [sexually deviant] community, and I know that you are not exactly the family values person that you put yourself out to be, well, then, beware," Todd, D-Birmingham, said.
Moore apparently was not worried.
Todd, who first made her threat on Facebook, has yet to follow through, and has acknowledged that to do so risked slander.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Letter from Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore to Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley" 1/27/15
The recent ruling of Judge Callie Granade of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama has raised serious, legitimate concerns about the propriety of federal court jurisdiction over the Alabama Sanctity of Marriage Amendment. Art, I, § 36.03, Ala, Const. of 1901.
As you know, nothing in the United States Constitution grants the federal government the authority to redefine the institution of marriage The people of this state have specifically recognized in our Constitution that marriage is “[a] sacred covenant, solemnized between a man and a woman”; that “[a] marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex is invalid in this state”; and that “[al union replicating marriage of or between persons of the same sex. . . shall be considered and treated in all respects as having no legal force or effect in this state.” Art. I, § 36.03(c), (b) & (g), Ala. Const. of 1901.
The Supreme Court of Alabama has likewise described marriage as “a divine institution,” imposing upon the parties “higher moral and religious obligations than those imposed by any mere human institution or government.” Hughes v. Hughes, 44 Ala. 698, 703 (1870). In Smith v. Smith, 141 Ala. 590, 592, 37 So. 638, 639 (1904), this Court again referred to marriage as a sacred relation.
Even the United States Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized that the basic foundation of marriage and family upon which our Country rests is “the union for life of one man and one woman in the holy estate of matrimony; the sure foundation of all that is stable and noble in our civilization; the best guaranty of that reverent morality which is the source of all beneficent progress in social and political improvement.” Murphy v. Ramsey, 114 U.S. 15, 45 (1885) (quoted in United States v. Bitty, 208 U.S. 393, 401 (1908)).
Today the destruction of that institution is upon us by federal courts using specious pretexts based on the Equal Protection, Due Process, and Full Faith and Credit Clauses of the United States Constitution. As of this date, 44 federal courts have imposed by judicial fiat same-sex marriages in 21 states of the Union, overturning the express will of the people in those states. If we are to preserve that “reverent morality which is our source of all beneficent progress in social and political improvement,” then we must act to oppose such tyranny!
On December 26, 1825, Thomas Jefferson wrote:
To read the entire letter above, CLICK HERE.
From "States Renew Fight to Stop Same-Sex Marriage" by Richard Fausset And Alan Blinder, New York Times 1/28/15
Republican state legislators in Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas have introduced bills this year that would prohibit state or local government employees from issuing marriage licenses to gay couples, despite federal court rulings declaring bans on same-sex marriage unconstitutional in those states and questions about the constitutionality of the proposed state laws. The bills would also strip the salaries of employees who issued the licenses.
Proponents of same-sex marriage contend that most of the state bills are almost certainly unconstitutional. And even in conservative-dominated statehouses, the chances of passage are unclear, given disagreements within the Republican Party on whether same-sex marriage should be a priority issue. Some experts say they could face sharp rebukes from judges who have ruled in favor of same-sex marriage.
Still, the bills probably foreshadow the kinds of fights that may continue to rage even if the United States Supreme Court eventually rules that same-sex marriages must be allowed in all 50 states. This month, the Supreme Court justices agreed to hear a case that could resolve whether same-sex marriage, currently allowed in 36 states and the District of Columbia, should be the law of the land.
The clash of religious principle with the rulings of the federal courts is perhaps most evident in North Carolina, where at least six magistrate judges, who are called upon to perform civil marriages, quit their jobs after a federal judge approved same-sex marriage there in October.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 3/4/15: From "A defiant Alabama regains ground against gay marriage" by Jay Reeves, Associated Press
The Alabama Supreme Court ordered county probate judges to uphold the state ban pending a final ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, which hears arguments in April on whether gay couples nationwide have a fundamental right to marry and whether states can ban such unions.
The all-Republican court ruled 7-1 that Alabama's 68 probate judges must stop issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples, despite a ruling by Granade that the ban is unconstitutional.
Montgomery County Probate Judge Steven Reed, a Democrat and one of the first to issue gay-marriage licenses following a January ruling by U.S. District Judge Callie Granade in Mobile, said he was duty-bound to turn gays and lesbians away again, for now. But he also suggested that he would join a new round of appeals.
Before Tuesday's ruling, 48 of the state's 67 counties were acknowledging that Alabama had become the 37th U.S. state where gays can legally wed, according to the Human Rights Campaign, which advocates for gay marriage nationwide. By Wednesday afternoon, the group couldn't find any county issuing licenses to gay and lesbian couples.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 3/3/15: From "Alabama Court Orders a Halt to Same-Sex Marriage Licenses" by Campbell Robertson, New York Times
In the decision, the judges insisted they could “interpret the United States Constitution independently from, and even contrary to, federal courts,” and did just that. They took on not just Judge Granade’s ruling point by point but also took issue with the United States Supreme Court’s ruling striking down parts of the federal Defense of Marriage Act in 2013. The judges said marriage is a state matter, but also made a more sweeping case, maintaining that only marriage between a man and a woman “provides the optimum environment for defining the responsibilities of parents and for raising children to become productive members of society.”
“Government has an obvious interest in offspring and the consequences that flow from the creation of each new generation, which is only naturally possible in the opposite-sex relationship, which is the primary reason marriage between men and women is sanctioned by state law,” the court ruled.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 3/6/15: From "Alabama Supreme Court first in nation to defy federal court gay marriage order" by Kent Faulk, The Birmingham News
[Chief Justice Roy] Moore abstained from voting on the Alabama Supreme Court's order this week because he said he didn't want the appearance of impropriety because of his previous public stances against gay marriage.
"I can't explain why more than 20 other states have bowed down to unlawful federal authority but Alabama is not one of them," Moore said. "A federal judge has no authority to overturn a state constitutional amendment in the face of a state court's opinion on the same matter."
Only three states have adopted same-sex marriage by referendum of the people, several state legislatures passed laws allowing it, and seven or eight state supreme courts and federal district orders in about 20 states have been issued to toss out bans and allow it.
"We applaud the Alabama Supreme Court for taking the courageous step of standing up to a blatant overreach by a federal judge and instead choosing to uphold the rule of law and the state's constitutional amendment protecting time-honored marriage," Tim Wildmon, President of American Family Association, stated in a press release.
"For far too long, we have seen errant federal judges unilaterally take the law into their own hands and strike down duly passed marriage protection provisions," Wildmon stated. "The Alabama Supreme Court has shown that it does not take kindly to one federal judge upending state law and overruling the voice of thousands of Alabama voters. We hope and pray that other courts will follow suit and uphold the law, rather than cave to orders to ignore it."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
What's next? Read New York Incestuous Marriage OK: Unanimous Appeals Court and also read Teen Girl to Marry Father in New Jersey—Adult Incest is Legal
UPDATE 3/24/15: 'Husband' Impregnates Both 'Married' Lesbian Wives (Polyamory)
Also read Pedophiles Win in 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals -- that's because Pedophilia is a Sexual Orientation, Like 'Being Gay'
UPDATE 3/6/15: Alabama Supreme Court Halts ALL Same-sex "Marriages" (see excerpts below)
UPDATE 10/7/15: 'Gay Marriage' Stopped in Alabama by Judges
For background, read 'Gay Marriage' Loses in Federal Court, on to Supreme Court
Also read the increasing number of court rulings AGAINST the redefinition of marriage.
And read 'Gay Marriage' Not Favored in Polls, Only in Court
From "Alabama Supreme Court Justice calls same-sex marriage ruling 'tyranny'" by Matt Bradwell, UPI 1/28/15
In the letter [to Gov. Bentley], Moore claims the District Court's ruling "raised serious, legitimate concerns about the propriety of federal court jurisdiction" and he even goes as far as to assert the ruling was an "unlawful opinion" and act of "tyranny."
On Friday, U.S. District Judge Ginny Granade ruled Alabama's law banning same-sex marriage was unconstitutional and actually harmed the children its supporters attempted to frame their defense around.
Within a day of sending the letter to Bentley, civil rights group The Southern Poverty Law Center [SPLC] filed an ethics complaint against Moore with the Judicial Inquiry Commission of Alabama.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore says federal judge's ruling on gay marriage not binding" by Mike Cason, The Birmingham News 1/28/15
Moore said his letter to the governor was not public comment on the case. He said as chief justice he is also the top administrator of the state court system.
"My duty as chief justice and administrative head of the court system is to enlighten those courts under my authority as to what the law is in this matter," Moore said.
"And the law is clearly that federal district courts and appellate courts are only persuasive authority to the courts of this state because the judges of state courts are equally competent to interpret federal law."
"Many states have just caved to it," Moore said. "They absolutely have. When a federal district judge rules, that's it. But they didn't have to.
"And I'm saying we don't have to. And it's in accordance with the law. It's not defiance."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore Threatens To Defy 'Tyranny' Of Federal Courts On Gay Marriage" by Ryan J. Reilly, Huffington Post 1/27/15
Moore's letter to Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley (R) came a few days after a federal judge in the state ruled that Alabama's same-sex marriage ban violates the constitutional rights of gay citizens. The ruling in Alabama is currently stayed for two weeks to allow the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to decide whether the marriages should continue to be delayed until the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments on the constitutionality of state same-sex marriage bans later this year.
While he didn't spell out exactly how he planned to defy the ruling of a federal court, Moore said he would "continue to recognize the Alabama Constitution," which has an amendment that bans same-sex marriage. Moore also pointed out rulings from the Supreme Court of Alabama -- from 1870 and 1904 -- that called marriage a "divine institution" and a "sacred relation."
Moore even quoted a U.S. Supreme Court ruling from 1885 (which was later quoted in a 1908 Supreme Court case) that he said indicated the court recognized the importance of marriage and family. He said the "destruction of that institution is upon us by federal courts using specious pretexts based on the Equal Protection, Due Process, and Full Faith and Credit Clauses" of the Constitution. He said that 44 federal courts have "imposed by judicial fiat same-sex marriages in 21 states of the union."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Chief Justice of Alabama Supreme Court Against Gay Marriage" posted at JD Journal 1/28/15
In the letter, Moore wrote, “I am dismayed by those judges in our state who have stated they will recognize and unilaterally enforce a federal court decision which does not bind them. I would advise them that the issuance of such licenses would be in defiance of the laws and constitution of Alabama.”
A constitutional law expert from the University of Alabama School of Law, Ronald Krotoszynski, said that the letter from Moore will carry very little weight. The reason for this is that federal constitutional law overrides that of the individual state constitutions.
“There is no credible legal argument that an order from a federal judge with jurisdiction over a matter isn’t binding on a state government,” he said.
Governor Bentley has said that he is in support of the state’s gay marriage ban and will fight to uphold it.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore says he will continue to recognize ban on same-sex marriage" by Mike Cason, The Birmingham News 1/27/15
[Gov.] Bentley issued a statement today after Moore's letter was released.
"The people of Alabama elected me to uphold our state Constitution, and when I took the oath of office last week, that is what I promised to do," the governor said.
"The people of Alabama voted in a constitutional amendment to define marriage as being between man and woman. As governor, I must uphold the Constitution. I am disappointed in Friday's ruling, and I will continue to oppose this ruling. The Federal government must not infringe on the rights of states."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore Defies Federal Court on Gay Marriage; SPLC Files Ethics Complaint" by Michael Gryboski, Christian Post Reporter 1/29/15
Alabama's government has opted to continue defending the constitutional amendment, filing a request to grant a stay until the US Supreme Court renders a decision on the matter.
Some observers, reported Fox News, believe that the ruling, even if it takes effect, may have a more limited scope than assumed.
"The Alabama Probate Judges' Association maintains that Friday's ruling applies only to the parties in that case, and that it doesn't require judges to issue marriage licenses to other same-sex couples," noted Fox [News].
Filed Wednesday, the SPLC's complaint was brought before the Judicial Inquiry Commission of Alabama and alleged that "Moore's actions violate Alabama's Canons of Judicial Ethics in numerous and significant regards."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Roy Moore denounces same-sex marriage ruling" by Brian Lyman, Montgomery Advertiser 1/27/15
. . . Rep. Patricia Todd, Alabama's only openly gay legislator, threatened to reveal which "pro-family value" politicians were having extramarital affairs if they continued criticizing gay marriage as immoral.
"I'm sick of the hypocrisy. If you start disparaging my [sexually deviant] community, and I know that you are not exactly the family values person that you put yourself out to be, well, then, beware," Todd, D-Birmingham, said.
Moore apparently was not worried.
Todd, who first made her threat on Facebook, has yet to follow through, and has acknowledged that to do so risked slander.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Letter from Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore to Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley" 1/27/15
The recent ruling of Judge Callie Granade of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama has raised serious, legitimate concerns about the propriety of federal court jurisdiction over the Alabama Sanctity of Marriage Amendment. Art, I, § 36.03, Ala, Const. of 1901.
As you know, nothing in the United States Constitution grants the federal government the authority to redefine the institution of marriage The people of this state have specifically recognized in our Constitution that marriage is “[a] sacred covenant, solemnized between a man and a woman”; that “[a] marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex is invalid in this state”; and that “[al union replicating marriage of or between persons of the same sex. . . shall be considered and treated in all respects as having no legal force or effect in this state.” Art. I, § 36.03(c), (b) & (g), Ala. Const. of 1901.
The Supreme Court of Alabama has likewise described marriage as “a divine institution,” imposing upon the parties “higher moral and religious obligations than those imposed by any mere human institution or government.” Hughes v. Hughes, 44 Ala. 698, 703 (1870). In Smith v. Smith, 141 Ala. 590, 592, 37 So. 638, 639 (1904), this Court again referred to marriage as a sacred relation.
Even the United States Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized that the basic foundation of marriage and family upon which our Country rests is “the union for life of one man and one woman in the holy estate of matrimony; the sure foundation of all that is stable and noble in our civilization; the best guaranty of that reverent morality which is the source of all beneficent progress in social and political improvement.” Murphy v. Ramsey, 114 U.S. 15, 45 (1885) (quoted in United States v. Bitty, 208 U.S. 393, 401 (1908)).
Today the destruction of that institution is upon us by federal courts using specious pretexts based on the Equal Protection, Due Process, and Full Faith and Credit Clauses of the United States Constitution. As of this date, 44 federal courts have imposed by judicial fiat same-sex marriages in 21 states of the Union, overturning the express will of the people in those states. If we are to preserve that “reverent morality which is our source of all beneficent progress in social and political improvement,” then we must act to oppose such tyranny!
On December 26, 1825, Thomas Jefferson wrote:
I see as you do, and with the deepest affliction, the rapid strides with which the federal branch of our government is advancing towards the usurpation of all the rights reserved to the States, and the consolidation in itself of all powers foreign and domestic and that too, by constructions which, if legitimate, leave no limits to their power. Take together the decisions of the federal court the doctrines of the President and the misconstructions of the constitutional compact [US, Constitution], acted on by the legislature of the federal branch, and it is but too evident that the three ruling branches of that department are in combination to strip their colleagues, the State authorities, of the powers reserved by them, and to exercise themselves, all functions foreign and domestic.Jefferson’s words precisely express my sentiments on this occasion. Our State Constitution and our morality are under attack by a federal court decision that has no basis in the Constitution of the United States. Nothing in the United States Constitution grants to the federal government the authority to desecrate the institution of marriage. Indeed, the Tenth Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” U.S. Const. Amend. X. An infringement upon the definition of marriage affects all that have entered into it in the past as well as all who will enter in the future.
Letter to William Branch Giles, December 26, 1825
To read the entire letter above, CLICK HERE.
From "States Renew Fight to Stop Same-Sex Marriage" by Richard Fausset And Alan Blinder, New York Times 1/28/15
Republican state legislators in Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas have introduced bills this year that would prohibit state or local government employees from issuing marriage licenses to gay couples, despite federal court rulings declaring bans on same-sex marriage unconstitutional in those states and questions about the constitutionality of the proposed state laws. The bills would also strip the salaries of employees who issued the licenses.
Proponents of same-sex marriage contend that most of the state bills are almost certainly unconstitutional. And even in conservative-dominated statehouses, the chances of passage are unclear, given disagreements within the Republican Party on whether same-sex marriage should be a priority issue. Some experts say they could face sharp rebukes from judges who have ruled in favor of same-sex marriage.
Still, the bills probably foreshadow the kinds of fights that may continue to rage even if the United States Supreme Court eventually rules that same-sex marriages must be allowed in all 50 states. This month, the Supreme Court justices agreed to hear a case that could resolve whether same-sex marriage, currently allowed in 36 states and the District of Columbia, should be the law of the land.
The clash of religious principle with the rulings of the federal courts is perhaps most evident in North Carolina, where at least six magistrate judges, who are called upon to perform civil marriages, quit their jobs after a federal judge approved same-sex marriage there in October.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 3/4/15: From "A defiant Alabama regains ground against gay marriage" by Jay Reeves, Associated Press
The Alabama Supreme Court ordered county probate judges to uphold the state ban pending a final ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, which hears arguments in April on whether gay couples nationwide have a fundamental right to marry and whether states can ban such unions.
The all-Republican court ruled 7-1 that Alabama's 68 probate judges must stop issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples, despite a ruling by Granade that the ban is unconstitutional.
Montgomery County Probate Judge Steven Reed, a Democrat and one of the first to issue gay-marriage licenses following a January ruling by U.S. District Judge Callie Granade in Mobile, said he was duty-bound to turn gays and lesbians away again, for now. But he also suggested that he would join a new round of appeals.
Before Tuesday's ruling, 48 of the state's 67 counties were acknowledging that Alabama had become the 37th U.S. state where gays can legally wed, according to the Human Rights Campaign, which advocates for gay marriage nationwide. By Wednesday afternoon, the group couldn't find any county issuing licenses to gay and lesbian couples.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 3/3/15: From "Alabama Court Orders a Halt to Same-Sex Marriage Licenses" by Campbell Robertson, New York Times
In the decision, the judges insisted they could “interpret the United States Constitution independently from, and even contrary to, federal courts,” and did just that. They took on not just Judge Granade’s ruling point by point but also took issue with the United States Supreme Court’s ruling striking down parts of the federal Defense of Marriage Act in 2013. The judges said marriage is a state matter, but also made a more sweeping case, maintaining that only marriage between a man and a woman “provides the optimum environment for defining the responsibilities of parents and for raising children to become productive members of society.”
“Government has an obvious interest in offspring and the consequences that flow from the creation of each new generation, which is only naturally possible in the opposite-sex relationship, which is the primary reason marriage between men and women is sanctioned by state law,” the court ruled.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 3/6/15: From "Alabama Supreme Court first in nation to defy federal court gay marriage order" by Kent Faulk, The Birmingham News
[Chief Justice Roy] Moore abstained from voting on the Alabama Supreme Court's order this week because he said he didn't want the appearance of impropriety because of his previous public stances against gay marriage.
"I can't explain why more than 20 other states have bowed down to unlawful federal authority but Alabama is not one of them," Moore said. "A federal judge has no authority to overturn a state constitutional amendment in the face of a state court's opinion on the same matter."
Only three states have adopted same-sex marriage by referendum of the people, several state legislatures passed laws allowing it, and seven or eight state supreme courts and federal district orders in about 20 states have been issued to toss out bans and allow it.
"We applaud the Alabama Supreme Court for taking the courageous step of standing up to a blatant overreach by a federal judge and instead choosing to uphold the rule of law and the state's constitutional amendment protecting time-honored marriage," Tim Wildmon, President of American Family Association, stated in a press release.
"For far too long, we have seen errant federal judges unilaterally take the law into their own hands and strike down duly passed marriage protection provisions," Wildmon stated. "The Alabama Supreme Court has shown that it does not take kindly to one federal judge upending state law and overruling the voice of thousands of Alabama voters. We hope and pray that other courts will follow suit and uphold the law, rather than cave to orders to ignore it."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
What's next? Read New York Incestuous Marriage OK: Unanimous Appeals Court and also read Teen Girl to Marry Father in New Jersey—Adult Incest is Legal
UPDATE 3/24/15: 'Husband' Impregnates Both 'Married' Lesbian Wives (Polyamory)
Also read Pedophiles Win in 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals -- that's because Pedophilia is a Sexual Orientation, Like 'Being Gay'
Sunday, December 14, 2014
Okla. Abortionist Arrested, Patient Claims Torture
Last week, an Oklahoma City area abortionist was arrested for selling abortion-inducing drugs to non-pregnant undercover investigators who posed as pregnant patients. Days after public announcement of the arrest, the Oklahoma Attorney General's office confirms that eight real pregnant patients have come forward with additional complaints.
Four Abortionists Charged in Indiana: Rape, Murder
Planned Parenthood Conceals Serial Rapist in Arizona
Federal Government Probes Planned Parenthood for Fraud
Texas Yanks Abortionist's License for 268 Killed
More Abortionists Admit Killing Kids After Birth
More Abortionists Linked to Murder Cases
In addition, read how states are cracking down on the murderous abortionists.
-- From "Warr Acres obstetrician booked on fraud complaint involving abortion drugs" posted at KOCO-TV5 (Oklahoma City, OK) 12/9/14
Attorney General Scott Pruitt announced Tuesday plans to charge 62-year-old Naresh G. Patel with three counts of obtaining money under a false pretense after an investigation that involved undercover female agents going into the Outpatient Services for Women clinic in Warr Acres.
A probable cause affidavit filed Tuesday in Oklahoma County District Court says Patel prescribed the three undercover agents abortion-inducing drugs even though they were not pregnant. A jail official said Patel was being booked early Tuesday afternoon with a $2,000 bail.
An answering service at Patel's clinic said it was closed until Monday and could not accept messages
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Patient Speaks Out After Learning Metro Abortion Doctor Accused Of Fraud" by Adrianna Iwasinski, KWTV-TV9 (Oklahoma City, OK) 12/11/14
This young woman does not want to be identified, but wanted to share her experience of going to Patel's women's clinic for an abortion earlier this year – an experience she kept secret for a very long time.
She learned Patel is charged with three counts of obtaining money by false pretense for prescribing abortion inducing drugs to patients who were not pregnant. He is also accused of performing an abortion on at least one woman who was not pregnant.
She feels Patel was taking advantage of women who were at their most vulnerable. Now that she is expecting another child, she wants to encourage women who also had a questionable experience with Patel to come forward.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "'It was like torture,' Patient describes procedure with abortion doctor accused of fraud" by Abby Broyles, KFOR-TV4 (Oklahoma City, OK) 12/11/14
She claims Dr. Patel lied to her about how far along she was in order to charge her more money for an abortion.
“I actually felt like I was having a heart attack a lot of the time. I’d gone into the hospital on two other occasions with chest pains,” she said.
She decided to get an abortion and went to see Dr. Naresh Patel at his Warr Acres clinic.
“I went back, and they quickly did this ultrasound and he immediately said ‘You’re two weeks further along than what you’re telling me,’ and I said, ‘I don’t know how that could be,” she said.
“They said, ‘Well, that’s going to be another $500,” she said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oklahoma Abortion Doctor Charged With Fraud" posted at KWTV-TV9 (Oklahoma City, OK) 12/9/14
Undercover agents from the Oklahoma Medical Licensure Board, the Oklahoma City Police Department and the Attorney General's Office set up appointments with Patel where the doctor performed ultrasounds and pregnancy tests on the women where he is alleged to have fraudulently identified each undercover agent as pregnant. Afterward, he prescribed them an abortion-inducing drug, provided directions for administering it and charged the female agents for the unnecessary treatment, according to the AG's office.
If convicted, Patel could face up to three years in jail and a maximum fine of $15,000.
Agents from the Attorney General's Office, Warr Acres Police Department and Oklahoma City Police Department also executed search warrants on Patel's business and home Tuesday morning.
According to the AG's office, an investigation into Patel's dubious practices arose from a complaint that he had performed an abortion procedure on Pamela King, even though she was not pregnant. King was diagnosed and died from complications of cervical cancer later that year, and her autopsy determined that she had not been pregnant in the time frame that the abortion procedure occurred.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oklahoma abortion doctor arrested after allegedly defrauding women" by Abby Broyles, KFOR-TV4 (Oklahoma City, OK) 12/9/14
“When we reviewed the death certificate, it stated [Pamela King] had not been pregnant in the last 12 months. And in speaking with the doctors, we were informed it would’ve been medically impossible for her to have been pregnant in August 2011 based on how severe her cervical cancer was at that time,” said Asst. Attorney General Megan Tilly.
This isn’t the first time Dr. Patel has made headlines.
Back in 1992, he made national headlines for burning more than 50 aborted fetuses in a field east of Shawnee.
Dr. Patel was never disciplined or charged with a crime.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortionist Arrested: Accused of Raping His Patients, Dumping Aborted Babies Bodies" by Cheryl Sullenger and Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 12/9/14
Patel is an abortionist with a long and particularly horrific history of Medical Board disciplinary actions, malpractice claims, and criminal cases. Nevertheless, financial documents found amid the medical records and waste indicate that Patel owns $39.4 million in real estate. His personal income exceeds $1.4 million annually. His net worth is listed at $28 million.
Board discipline
In 1990, Patel was disciplined by the Oklahoma Medical Board for Unprofessional Conduct for “failing to maintain dispensing records for dangerous drugs and keep complete and accurate records of purchase and dispensing of controlled drugs.”
. . .
Rape and sodomy charges
In 1993, Patel was charged with one count of “forcible oral sodomy” and one count of sexual battery after a patient alleged that he had sexually assaulted her on an examination table prior to an abortion. She then recorded two phone conversations with him in which she alleged that he asked if she was angry about the assault and apologized for it.
Three victims came forward and told of their encounters with Patel.
. . .
Employee obtains protective order
In 2003, one of his employees sought and received a protective order after she told the court that Patel became angry over a difficult patient took it out on her.
. . .
Malpractice
A judge ordered Patel to pay $240,000 in damages to a 15-year-old girl left permanently injured following an attempted abortion in June 1989. . . .
Another malpractice case was filed by a patient who underwent an abortion by Patel only to find out later she was 20 weeks pregnant. That suit was also dismissed.
. . .
Agreement with University of Oklahoma
Despite Patel’s frightful history, the University of Oklahoma entered into an agreement with Patel and Outpatient Services for Women abortion clinic on February 5, 2013, to provide training services to UO students.
To read the entire description of Patel's notorious history, CLICK HERE.
Also read Abortionists Battle to Kill Without Clinics
And read Learn to be Abortionist in 6-weeks, Free Online
"A nurse came into the room and strapped my wrists down to the table. They strapped my ankles down where my feet were, and she held my forehead down to the table. . . . It was like torture"For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:
-- Former patient, claiming abortionist extorted $500 from her
Four Abortionists Charged in Indiana: Rape, Murder
Planned Parenthood Conceals Serial Rapist in Arizona
Federal Government Probes Planned Parenthood for Fraud
Texas Yanks Abortionist's License for 268 Killed
More Abortionists Admit Killing Kids After Birth
More Abortionists Linked to Murder Cases
In addition, read how states are cracking down on the murderous abortionists.
-- From "Warr Acres obstetrician booked on fraud complaint involving abortion drugs" posted at KOCO-TV5 (Oklahoma City, OK) 12/9/14
Attorney General Scott Pruitt announced Tuesday plans to charge 62-year-old Naresh G. Patel with three counts of obtaining money under a false pretense after an investigation that involved undercover female agents going into the Outpatient Services for Women clinic in Warr Acres.
A probable cause affidavit filed Tuesday in Oklahoma County District Court says Patel prescribed the three undercover agents abortion-inducing drugs even though they were not pregnant. A jail official said Patel was being booked early Tuesday afternoon with a $2,000 bail.
An answering service at Patel's clinic said it was closed until Monday and could not accept messages
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Patient Speaks Out After Learning Metro Abortion Doctor Accused Of Fraud" by Adrianna Iwasinski, KWTV-TV9 (Oklahoma City, OK) 12/11/14
This young woman does not want to be identified, but wanted to share her experience of going to Patel's women's clinic for an abortion earlier this year – an experience she kept secret for a very long time.
She learned Patel is charged with three counts of obtaining money by false pretense for prescribing abortion inducing drugs to patients who were not pregnant. He is also accused of performing an abortion on at least one woman who was not pregnant.
She feels Patel was taking advantage of women who were at their most vulnerable. Now that she is expecting another child, she wants to encourage women who also had a questionable experience with Patel to come forward.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "'It was like torture,' Patient describes procedure with abortion doctor accused of fraud" by Abby Broyles, KFOR-TV4 (Oklahoma City, OK) 12/11/14
She claims Dr. Patel lied to her about how far along she was in order to charge her more money for an abortion.
“I actually felt like I was having a heart attack a lot of the time. I’d gone into the hospital on two other occasions with chest pains,” she said.
She decided to get an abortion and went to see Dr. Naresh Patel at his Warr Acres clinic.
“I went back, and they quickly did this ultrasound and he immediately said ‘You’re two weeks further along than what you’re telling me,’ and I said, ‘I don’t know how that could be,” she said.
“They said, ‘Well, that’s going to be another $500,” she said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oklahoma Abortion Doctor Charged With Fraud" posted at KWTV-TV9 (Oklahoma City, OK) 12/9/14
Undercover agents from the Oklahoma Medical Licensure Board, the Oklahoma City Police Department and the Attorney General's Office set up appointments with Patel where the doctor performed ultrasounds and pregnancy tests on the women where he is alleged to have fraudulently identified each undercover agent as pregnant. Afterward, he prescribed them an abortion-inducing drug, provided directions for administering it and charged the female agents for the unnecessary treatment, according to the AG's office.
If convicted, Patel could face up to three years in jail and a maximum fine of $15,000.
Agents from the Attorney General's Office, Warr Acres Police Department and Oklahoma City Police Department also executed search warrants on Patel's business and home Tuesday morning.
According to the AG's office, an investigation into Patel's dubious practices arose from a complaint that he had performed an abortion procedure on Pamela King, even though she was not pregnant. King was diagnosed and died from complications of cervical cancer later that year, and her autopsy determined that she had not been pregnant in the time frame that the abortion procedure occurred.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oklahoma abortion doctor arrested after allegedly defrauding women" by Abby Broyles, KFOR-TV4 (Oklahoma City, OK) 12/9/14
“When we reviewed the death certificate, it stated [Pamela King] had not been pregnant in the last 12 months. And in speaking with the doctors, we were informed it would’ve been medically impossible for her to have been pregnant in August 2011 based on how severe her cervical cancer was at that time,” said Asst. Attorney General Megan Tilly.
This isn’t the first time Dr. Patel has made headlines.
Back in 1992, he made national headlines for burning more than 50 aborted fetuses in a field east of Shawnee.
Dr. Patel was never disciplined or charged with a crime.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortionist Arrested: Accused of Raping His Patients, Dumping Aborted Babies Bodies" by Cheryl Sullenger and Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 12/9/14
Patel is an abortionist with a long and particularly horrific history of Medical Board disciplinary actions, malpractice claims, and criminal cases. Nevertheless, financial documents found amid the medical records and waste indicate that Patel owns $39.4 million in real estate. His personal income exceeds $1.4 million annually. His net worth is listed at $28 million.
Board discipline
In 1990, Patel was disciplined by the Oklahoma Medical Board for Unprofessional Conduct for “failing to maintain dispensing records for dangerous drugs and keep complete and accurate records of purchase and dispensing of controlled drugs.”
. . .
Rape and sodomy charges
In 1993, Patel was charged with one count of “forcible oral sodomy” and one count of sexual battery after a patient alleged that he had sexually assaulted her on an examination table prior to an abortion. She then recorded two phone conversations with him in which she alleged that he asked if she was angry about the assault and apologized for it.
Three victims came forward and told of their encounters with Patel.
. . .
Employee obtains protective order
In 2003, one of his employees sought and received a protective order after she told the court that Patel became angry over a difficult patient took it out on her.
. . .
Malpractice
A judge ordered Patel to pay $240,000 in damages to a 15-year-old girl left permanently injured following an attempted abortion in June 1989. . . .
Another malpractice case was filed by a patient who underwent an abortion by Patel only to find out later she was 20 weeks pregnant. That suit was also dismissed.
. . .
Agreement with University of Oklahoma
Despite Patel’s frightful history, the University of Oklahoma entered into an agreement with Patel and Outpatient Services for Women abortion clinic on February 5, 2013, to provide training services to UO students.
To read the entire description of Patel's notorious history, CLICK HERE.
Also read Abortionists Battle to Kill Without Clinics
And read Learn to be Abortionist in 6-weeks, Free Online
Sunday, October 26, 2014
Cutting Okla. Abortions in Half: Judges OK New Law
Abortionists lost in courts twice last week as Oklahoma judges declined to issue injunctions against new state laws requiring abortion clinics to ensure the safety of women (but not their babies), which will result in the closure of one clinic that accounts for nearly half of all abortions in the state.
For background, read Abortion Clinic Closings Set Record; Abortionists Admit Defeat and are now Forced to Risk All in Supreme Court
Also read Abortionists Battle to Kill Without Clinics
In addition, read Learn to be Abortionist in 6-weeks, Free Online
-- From "Oklahoma: Challenge to Abortion Law Denied" by Erik Eckholm, New York Times 10/24/14
A state judge declined on Friday to block a law requiring doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles. The Center for Reproductive Rights, which had challenged the law on behalf of Dr. Larry A. Burns of Norman, said it was filing an emergency appeal with the State Supreme Court.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Judge Rules That Abortion Doctors Must Have Admitting Privileges" by The Associated Press 10/24/14
Oklahoma County District Judge Bill Graves ruled Friday against a legal challenge on behalf of a Norman clinic that performs nearly half of the abortions in the state.
Attorneys for Dr. Larry Burns say the law [Senate Bill 1848] could force him to shut down his practice. They say he's applied for admitting privileges at 16 hospitals without success. His practice performs about 44 percent of abortions in the state, and is one of only three in Oklahoma.
But Graves denied the request for a temporary injunction that would have put the law on hold.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Judge refuses to block challenged law putting restrictions on abortions" by Barbara Hoberock, Tulsa World Capitol Bureau 10/25/14
[Dr. Larry Burns, whose Norman, OK clinic opened in 1974,] alleged it violated the constitutional requirement that bills contain one subject. He also alleged it violated the ban on special laws because it singled out abortion doctors for special treatment.
He was seeking to put the law on hold pending the outcome of the challenge. The law takes effect Nov. 1.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oklahoma County judge rules against abortion doctor in effort to put new law on hold" by Nolan Clay, The Oklahoman 10/25/14
Graves refused Friday to issue either a temporary restraining order or temporary injunction. In a four-page order, the judge found the doctor failed to show he is likely to succeed on the merits of his constitutional claims.
The judge criticized the doctor for waiting until mid-July — 51 days after Gov. Mary Fallin signed the law in May — before applying for admitting privileges at the first of the 16 hospitals.
The judge also noted that Burns could comply with the law by simply hiring another doctor who already had admitting privileges to be at the clinic when abortions are performed.
In 2013 alone, by the doctor’s own count, he performed abortions for 2,046 women.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oklahoma judge allows law banning abortion pills to take effect" by Heide Brandes, Reuters 10/22/14
An Oklahoma judge said on Wednesday he will allow a law that bans abortion-inducing drugs [RU-486] to take effect as planned on Nov. 1, over the objections of abortion rights advocates who said the measure is poor public health policy that could put women at risk.
Oklahoma District Court Judge Robert Stuart turned down a request by abortion rights groups to halt the measure from taking effect. Stuart also allowed a provision that would limit liability claims against physicians due to the law.
Earlier this year, lawmakers in the heavily Republican state approved new restrictions on abortion clinics they said were aimed at protecting women's health, but abortion rights advocates said were actually intended to shut clinics.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Judge Lets Oklahoma Ban Abortion Drugs" by David Lee, Courthouse News Service 10/22/14
Signed into law in April, HB 2684 bans off-label use of FDA-approved abortion drugs and requires that a physician provide surgical care and access to medical facilities to prescribe such drugs.
The plaintiffs claimed the law places "burdensome and arbitrary" restrictions on medical care for abortions.
"If the act is allowed to take effect, some women will be prevented altogether from terminating an early pregnancy by using medication alone, and others will be deprived of the safest and most effective methods of doing so," the 5-page motion states.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion advocates lose one in Oklahoma" by Charlie Butts, OneNewsNow.com 10/24/14
The bill being challenged simply requires that abortionists use the drug according to Federal Drug Administration protocols – and as expected, pro-abortion groups filed suit in federal court. The groups asked Oklahoma District Court Judge Robert Stuart to issue an injunction against the law, which is set to take effect November 1.
OneNewsNow talked with State Representative Randy Grau, sponsor of the bill, who says Judge Stuart "rejected that [argument] and ... said they didn't have any compelling argument or reason to keep this law from going into effect."
Grau adds that while Oklahoma is looking to provide protection for women using the drug, "what [abortion advocates] want is unfettered access."
But the legal battle isn't over. The state and out-of-state lawyers for the abortion industry are now preparing to argue the case in federal court.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Four Abortionists Charged in Indiana: Rape, Murder as well as Planned Parenthood Conceals Serial Rapist in Arizona
For background, read Abortion Clinic Closings Set Record; Abortionists Admit Defeat and are now Forced to Risk All in Supreme Court
Also read Abortionists Battle to Kill Without Clinics
In addition, read Learn to be Abortionist in 6-weeks, Free Online
-- From "Oklahoma: Challenge to Abortion Law Denied" by Erik Eckholm, New York Times 10/24/14
A state judge declined on Friday to block a law requiring doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles. The Center for Reproductive Rights, which had challenged the law on behalf of Dr. Larry A. Burns of Norman, said it was filing an emergency appeal with the State Supreme Court.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Judge Rules That Abortion Doctors Must Have Admitting Privileges" by The Associated Press 10/24/14
Oklahoma County District Judge Bill Graves ruled Friday against a legal challenge on behalf of a Norman clinic that performs nearly half of the abortions in the state.
Attorneys for Dr. Larry Burns say the law [Senate Bill 1848] could force him to shut down his practice. They say he's applied for admitting privileges at 16 hospitals without success. His practice performs about 44 percent of abortions in the state, and is one of only three in Oklahoma.
But Graves denied the request for a temporary injunction that would have put the law on hold.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Judge refuses to block challenged law putting restrictions on abortions" by Barbara Hoberock, Tulsa World Capitol Bureau 10/25/14
[Dr. Larry Burns, whose Norman, OK clinic opened in 1974,] alleged it violated the constitutional requirement that bills contain one subject. He also alleged it violated the ban on special laws because it singled out abortion doctors for special treatment.
He was seeking to put the law on hold pending the outcome of the challenge. The law takes effect Nov. 1.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oklahoma County judge rules against abortion doctor in effort to put new law on hold" by Nolan Clay, The Oklahoman 10/25/14
Graves refused Friday to issue either a temporary restraining order or temporary injunction. In a four-page order, the judge found the doctor failed to show he is likely to succeed on the merits of his constitutional claims.
The judge criticized the doctor for waiting until mid-July — 51 days after Gov. Mary Fallin signed the law in May — before applying for admitting privileges at the first of the 16 hospitals.
The judge also noted that Burns could comply with the law by simply hiring another doctor who already had admitting privileges to be at the clinic when abortions are performed.
In 2013 alone, by the doctor’s own count, he performed abortions for 2,046 women.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oklahoma judge allows law banning abortion pills to take effect" by Heide Brandes, Reuters 10/22/14
An Oklahoma judge said on Wednesday he will allow a law that bans abortion-inducing drugs [RU-486] to take effect as planned on Nov. 1, over the objections of abortion rights advocates who said the measure is poor public health policy that could put women at risk.
Oklahoma District Court Judge Robert Stuart turned down a request by abortion rights groups to halt the measure from taking effect. Stuart also allowed a provision that would limit liability claims against physicians due to the law.
Earlier this year, lawmakers in the heavily Republican state approved new restrictions on abortion clinics they said were aimed at protecting women's health, but abortion rights advocates said were actually intended to shut clinics.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Judge Lets Oklahoma Ban Abortion Drugs" by David Lee, Courthouse News Service 10/22/14
Signed into law in April, HB 2684 bans off-label use of FDA-approved abortion drugs and requires that a physician provide surgical care and access to medical facilities to prescribe such drugs.
The plaintiffs claimed the law places "burdensome and arbitrary" restrictions on medical care for abortions.
"If the act is allowed to take effect, some women will be prevented altogether from terminating an early pregnancy by using medication alone, and others will be deprived of the safest and most effective methods of doing so," the 5-page motion states.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion advocates lose one in Oklahoma" by Charlie Butts, OneNewsNow.com 10/24/14
The bill being challenged simply requires that abortionists use the drug according to Federal Drug Administration protocols – and as expected, pro-abortion groups filed suit in federal court. The groups asked Oklahoma District Court Judge Robert Stuart to issue an injunction against the law, which is set to take effect November 1.
OneNewsNow talked with State Representative Randy Grau, sponsor of the bill, who says Judge Stuart "rejected that [argument] and ... said they didn't have any compelling argument or reason to keep this law from going into effect."
Grau adds that while Oklahoma is looking to provide protection for women using the drug, "what [abortion advocates] want is unfettered access."
But the legal battle isn't over. The state and out-of-state lawyers for the abortion industry are now preparing to argue the case in federal court.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Four Abortionists Charged in Indiana: Rape, Murder as well as Planned Parenthood Conceals Serial Rapist in Arizona
Saturday, October 11, 2014
Okla. School Challenges Atheists' Lawsuit Threat
The Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) wrote Superintendent Dr. Fred Rhodes of the Putnum County Schools concerning a traditional painting by Donald Zolan of two small children with clasped hands captioned "Faith in America." While the FFRF is demanding a poster depicting the painting be removed from the office at Kenneth Cooper Middle School in Oklahoma City, the district has refused on advice of counsel.
For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:
Oklahoma School Assures Wisconsin Atheists: No Praying Coaches Here
North Carolinians Pray at School, Defying Wisconsin Atheists
Atheists Strip Memorial Crosses From Arkansas Football
Georgia Football Monument Must Go, Atheists Demand
Also read Atheists Threaten to Sue Every School in Tennessee and in Mississippi but admit they're Short on Lawyers to Sue ALL Christians
-- From "See Why This School District Is Standing Up to an Atheist Group" by Kate Scanlon, The Daily Signal 10/9/14
Freedom From Religion Foundation attorney Andrew Seidel wrote that the poster depicts “two children with their hands clasped in prayer, with an American flag background,” and as such is inappropriate material for a school.
“The meaning could not be more clear, real American children pray,” Seidel wrote.
Putnam County Schools attorney Anthony Childers responded to the atheist group, writing that the poster does not “promote any particular faith and does not create coercive pressure on students who may see the image.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Atheists Want Painting That Suggests 'Real American Children Pray' Removed From School's Office But District Refuses" by Leonardo Blair, Christian Post Reporter 10/8/14
"The poster complained of has hung in the school office for 18 years without a complaint, prior to your letter. To date, the district has not received any complaint from any resident, student or patron of the district who believes that the image conveys an improper religious message. We cannot agree that the poster displayed in the office is a per se violation of the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution," wrote attorney Anthony T. Childers in his response to FFRF on behalf of the school district.
"Though, as you've pointed out, the title given to the artwork by the original artist is labeled 'Faith in America', there is no text displayed with the poster which imputes the artist's intent, theme, or title," he continued.
"…At this time, we do not believe that the image violates the Establishment Clause and the District will not agree to remove the image from its office," Childers added.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "How An Oklahoma School District Responds To An Atheist Attack Over This Image Will Inspire You" by Norvell Rose, Western Journalism 10/10/14
The FFRF’s attorney fired back a detailed four-page emailed letter, calling the district’s response “insufficient,” and making clear his client would keep pushing to have the poster removed…even suggesting that legal action might be on the horizon.
Also read U.S. Supreme Court rules in favor of public prayer, and read the resulting resurgence in public prayer following the Supreme Court decision including the long list of states enacting laws to bring prayer back to schools.
For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:
Oklahoma School Assures Wisconsin Atheists: No Praying Coaches Here
North Carolinians Pray at School, Defying Wisconsin Atheists
Atheists Strip Memorial Crosses From Arkansas Football
Georgia Football Monument Must Go, Atheists Demand
Also read Atheists Threaten to Sue Every School in Tennessee and in Mississippi but admit they're Short on Lawyers to Sue ALL Christians
-- From "See Why This School District Is Standing Up to an Atheist Group" by Kate Scanlon, The Daily Signal 10/9/14
Freedom From Religion Foundation attorney Andrew Seidel wrote that the poster depicts “two children with their hands clasped in prayer, with an American flag background,” and as such is inappropriate material for a school.
“The meaning could not be more clear, real American children pray,” Seidel wrote.
Putnam County Schools attorney Anthony Childers responded to the atheist group, writing that the poster does not “promote any particular faith and does not create coercive pressure on students who may see the image.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Atheists Want Painting That Suggests 'Real American Children Pray' Removed From School's Office But District Refuses" by Leonardo Blair, Christian Post Reporter 10/8/14
"The poster complained of has hung in the school office for 18 years without a complaint, prior to your letter. To date, the district has not received any complaint from any resident, student or patron of the district who believes that the image conveys an improper religious message. We cannot agree that the poster displayed in the office is a per se violation of the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution," wrote attorney Anthony T. Childers in his response to FFRF on behalf of the school district.
"Though, as you've pointed out, the title given to the artwork by the original artist is labeled 'Faith in America', there is no text displayed with the poster which imputes the artist's intent, theme, or title," he continued.
"…At this time, we do not believe that the image violates the Establishment Clause and the District will not agree to remove the image from its office," Childers added.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "How An Oklahoma School District Responds To An Atheist Attack Over This Image Will Inspire You" by Norvell Rose, Western Journalism 10/10/14
The FFRF’s attorney fired back a detailed four-page emailed letter, calling the district’s response “insufficient,” and making clear his client would keep pushing to have the poster removed…even suggesting that legal action might be on the horizon.
“Last year, FFRF paired with the ACLU to sue a school district in Ohio over a similar issue. The school had displayed a portrait of Jesus for more than 60 years, a clear, if longstanding, violation. The case cost the school district $95,000 in a court case that need not ever have been filed. We wrote them a letter asking for the picture to be removed but were ignored.To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
“Moreover, this is not simply a picture of clasped hands. It is a picture of children praying. In many respects it is more egregious than the Jesus painting in the Jackson case. This picture tells students in the school that real American children pray.
“It equates piety and patriotism. No court would seriously entertain an argument that an image of two elementary school aged children, their hands clasped in prayer, one’s eyes lifted to Heaven, entitled 'Faith in America' is not religious.”
Also read U.S. Supreme Court rules in favor of public prayer, and read the resulting resurgence in public prayer following the Supreme Court decision including the long list of states enacting laws to bring prayer back to schools.
Thursday, June 26, 2014
'Gay Marriage' NOT Protected, Says Appellate Judge
Yesterday, more judges ruled that American voters are barred from defining natural marriage (e.g.: Indiana), but also yesterday, Judge Paul Kelly of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals became the only federal judge, since last year's Supreme Court ruling on DOMA, to rule that the U.S. Constitution does NOT provide a special right for homosexual "marriage."
UPDATE 11/7/14: 'Gay Marriage' Loses in Federal Appeals Court; on to Supreme Court
UPDATE 7/30/14: 4th Circuit Judge Bucks Majority 'Gay Marriage' Ruling, Saying Polygamy Will Follow
For background, read how activist judges across America are forbidding voters the right to define marriage as between one man and one woman.
However, also read 'Gay Marriage' Not Favored in Polls, Only in Court
In addition, read that just this week, Vice President Biden declared that the Gay Agenda must trump religious beliefs, and even a so-called Tea Party U.S. Senator said that same-sex "marriage" and abortion are non-issues.
-- From "Thoughts on today’s Tenth Circuit decision striking down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage" by Ilya Somin, Professor of Law at George Mason University School of Law, Washington Post 6/25/14
. . . this decision is significant because it is the first such ruling by an appellate court. It is also notable because there is a lengthy and detailed dissent by Judge Paul Kelly, who has now become the first judge since Windsor to conclude that a state law banning same-sex marriage does not violate the Constitution. Kelly’s opinion suggests that there is not a clear consensus in the federal judiciary about either the implications of Windsor or the same-sex marriage issue more generally.
. . . today’s decision is an important victory for advocates of same-sex marriage. But Judge Kelly’s dissent suggests that the legal battle over the issue is far from over. The question is likely to return to the Supreme Court, quite possibly sooner than many of us at first anticipated.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Ruling shows crack in legal gay marriage unanimity" by Nicholas Riccardi, Associated Press 6/26/14
Judge Paul J. Kelly, Jr. was in the minority in his opinion as the two other judges on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals panel found the U.S. Constitution protects the rights of gay couples to marry. Kelly has broken the string of 16 state and federal judges who sided with gay marriage advocates in cases across the country over the past year.
Kelly, 73, is a Republican and appointee of President George H.W. Bush . . . in his 21-page dissent, Kelly warned that his colleagues were overreaching in striking down Utah's voter-approved gay marriage ban.
Creating a national mandate for gay marriage, even in states where it is unpopular, "turns the notion of a limited national government on its head," he wrote, adding later: "We should resist the temptation to become philosopher-kings, imposing our views under the guise of constitutional interpretation of the 14th Amendment."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Utah plans to appeal appellate court's ruling on same-sex marriage to U.S. Supreme Court" by Marjorie Cortez, Deseret News National Edition 6/25/14
The Utah Attorney General's Office said it will appeal to the high court but did not rule out the possibility of first asking the full 10th Circuit court to review the case.
. . . the ruling also brought a defense of state rights. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Paul J. Kelly Jr. dissented from Judge Carlos Lucero and Judge Jerome Holmes in the ruling . . .
"If the states are laboratories of democracy, requiring every state to recognize same-gender unions — contrary to the views of its electorate and representatives — turns the notion of limited government on its head," [Judge Kelly] wrote. "Marriage is an important social institution commonly understood to protect this and future generations. That states sincerely differ about the best way to do this is inevitable."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 7/18/14: "Appeals court strikes down Oklahoma gay marriage ban" by Richard Wolf, USA TODAY
[The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit] in Denver struck down a second state ban on same-sex marriage Friday, ruling that Oklahoma -- like Utah before it - cannot prohibit gays and lesbians from marrying.
As was the case with Utah's appeal, the panel split 2-1, with Judges Carlos Lucero and Jerome Holmes voting to strike down the ban and Judge Paul Kelly dissenting.
In his dissent, Kelly -- named to the bench by President George H.W. Bush -- said "any change in the definition of marriage rightly belongs to the people of Oklahoma, not a federal court. . . . At a time when vigorous public debate is defining policies concerning sexual orientation, this court has intervened with a view of marriage ostensibly driven by the Constitution," Kelly said. "Unfortunately, this approach short-circuits the healthy political processes leading to a rough consensus on matters of sexual autonomy, and marginalizes those of good faith who draw the line short of same-gender marriage."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 11/7/14: 'Gay Marriage' Loses in Federal Appeals Court; on to Supreme Court
UPDATE 7/30/14: 4th Circuit Judge Bucks Majority 'Gay Marriage' Ruling, Saying Polygamy Will Follow
For background, read how activist judges across America are forbidding voters the right to define marriage as between one man and one woman.
However, also read 'Gay Marriage' Not Favored in Polls, Only in Court
In addition, read that just this week, Vice President Biden declared that the Gay Agenda must trump religious beliefs, and even a so-called Tea Party U.S. Senator said that same-sex "marriage" and abortion are non-issues.
-- From "Thoughts on today’s Tenth Circuit decision striking down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage" by Ilya Somin, Professor of Law at George Mason University School of Law, Washington Post 6/25/14
. . . this decision is significant because it is the first such ruling by an appellate court. It is also notable because there is a lengthy and detailed dissent by Judge Paul Kelly, who has now become the first judge since Windsor to conclude that a state law banning same-sex marriage does not violate the Constitution. Kelly’s opinion suggests that there is not a clear consensus in the federal judiciary about either the implications of Windsor or the same-sex marriage issue more generally.
. . . today’s decision is an important victory for advocates of same-sex marriage. But Judge Kelly’s dissent suggests that the legal battle over the issue is far from over. The question is likely to return to the Supreme Court, quite possibly sooner than many of us at first anticipated.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Ruling shows crack in legal gay marriage unanimity" by Nicholas Riccardi, Associated Press 6/26/14
Judge Paul J. Kelly, Jr. was in the minority in his opinion as the two other judges on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals panel found the U.S. Constitution protects the rights of gay couples to marry. Kelly has broken the string of 16 state and federal judges who sided with gay marriage advocates in cases across the country over the past year.
Kelly, 73, is a Republican and appointee of President George H.W. Bush . . . in his 21-page dissent, Kelly warned that his colleagues were overreaching in striking down Utah's voter-approved gay marriage ban.
Creating a national mandate for gay marriage, even in states where it is unpopular, "turns the notion of a limited national government on its head," he wrote, adding later: "We should resist the temptation to become philosopher-kings, imposing our views under the guise of constitutional interpretation of the 14th Amendment."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Utah plans to appeal appellate court's ruling on same-sex marriage to U.S. Supreme Court" by Marjorie Cortez, Deseret News National Edition 6/25/14
The Utah Attorney General's Office said it will appeal to the high court but did not rule out the possibility of first asking the full 10th Circuit court to review the case.
. . . the ruling also brought a defense of state rights. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Paul J. Kelly Jr. dissented from Judge Carlos Lucero and Judge Jerome Holmes in the ruling . . .
"If the states are laboratories of democracy, requiring every state to recognize same-gender unions — contrary to the views of its electorate and representatives — turns the notion of limited government on its head," [Judge Kelly] wrote. "Marriage is an important social institution commonly understood to protect this and future generations. That states sincerely differ about the best way to do this is inevitable."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 7/18/14: "Appeals court strikes down Oklahoma gay marriage ban" by Richard Wolf, USA TODAY
[The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit] in Denver struck down a second state ban on same-sex marriage Friday, ruling that Oklahoma -- like Utah before it - cannot prohibit gays and lesbians from marrying.
As was the case with Utah's appeal, the panel split 2-1, with Judges Carlos Lucero and Jerome Holmes voting to strike down the ban and Judge Paul Kelly dissenting.
In his dissent, Kelly -- named to the bench by President George H.W. Bush -- said "any change in the definition of marriage rightly belongs to the people of Oklahoma, not a federal court. . . . At a time when vigorous public debate is defining policies concerning sexual orientation, this court has intervened with a view of marriage ostensibly driven by the Constitution," Kelly said. "Unfortunately, this approach short-circuits the healthy political processes leading to a rough consensus on matters of sexual autonomy, and marginalizes those of good faith who draw the line short of same-gender marriage."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)