Gay marriage (1 Viewer)

[cstu]

SUPREME COURT ACTS UNEXPECTEDLY

The Supreme Court refused to get involved in the national debate over same-sex marriage Monday, leaving intact lower court rulings that will eventually lead to legalizing the practice in 11 additional states.

 

[cstu]

Looks like the gay marriage advocates have won. Only a matter of time before it's legal in all 50 states.

 

[timschochet]

Looks like the gay marriage advocates have won. Only a matter of time before it's legal in all 50 states.

It's amazing to me how fast this is going.

 

[General Malaise]

The guy looks worse and worse every single day....

President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would restrict marriage to two people of the opposite sex but leave open the possibility that states could allow civil unions. - February 25, 2004

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Is traditional marriage ruined yet?

 

[CBusAlex]

So... did the court refuse to hear any of the cases because they're waiting for a better one to come along? Or are they just going to consider the matter settled as long as there are no conflicting rulings in the lower counts?

(I realize the SC doesn't generally explain why they deny cert, but am hoping some of the law-talkin' guys on here might have an educated guess.)

 

[Scoresman]

So... did the court refuse to hear any of the cases because they're waiting for a better one to come along? Or are they just going to consider the matter settled as long as there are no conflicting rulings in the lower counts?

(I realize the SC doesn't generally explain why they deny cert, but am hoping some of the law-talkin' guys on here might have an educated guess.)

they probably just realized how stupid the cases all were and how dumb anti-gay people are.

 

[Koya]

The guy looks worse and worse every single day....

President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would restrict marriage to two people of the opposite sex but leave open the possibility that states could allow civil unions. - February 25, 2004

It's not like the Clinton's were so forward thinking on this subject... and how long did it take the Liberal Icon of Obama to provide support?

 

[Koya]

Is traditional marriage ruined yet?

Well, yes... but it has nothing to do with the gays jumpin' in.

 

[TobiasFunke]

The guy looks worse and worse every single day....

President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would restrict marriage to two people of the opposite sex but leave open the possibility that states could allow civil unions. - February 25, 2004

It's not like the Clinton's were so forward thinking on this subject... and how long did it take the Liberal Icon of Obama to provide support?

There's a significant difference between the silly hedging that Obama and Dems were doing five years ago and supporting a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage. One is just kinda gutless, the other is an attempt to make intolerance the highest law of the land.

 

[joffer]

watching the religious right lose their minds over this is really entertaining

 

[fatness]

A day after bans on gay marriage fell in other parts of the country when the Supreme Court declined to hear appeals, the 9th Circuit has ruled that such laws in Idaho and Nevada are "impermissible gender discrimination." That ruling will impact Arizona's constitutional prohibition against same-sex marriage.

"We hold that the Idaho and Nevada laws at issue violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because they deny lesbians and gays who wish to marry persons of the same sex a right they afford to individuals who wish to marry persons of the opposite sex," the decisions in two cases filed Tuesday read.

"Idaho and Nevada’s same-sex marriage proscriptions are sex based, and these bans do serve to preserve 'invidious, archaic, and overbroad stereotypes' concerning gender roles. The bans therefore must fail as impermissible gender discrimination," appeals court Judge Marsah Berzon wrote in a concurring opinion that formed part of the near-identical 90-page decisions in the cases.

Judges are wising up to this stuff.

http://www.tucsonsentinel.com/local/report/100714_gay_marriage/9th-circuit-tosses-gay-marriage-bans-ruling-covers-arizona/

 

[Koya]

The guy looks worse and worse every single day....

President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would restrict marriage to two people of the opposite sex but leave open the possibility that states could allow civil unions. - February 25, 2004

It's not like the Clinton's were so forward thinking on this subject... and how long did it take the Liberal Icon of Obama to provide support?

There's a significant difference between the silly hedging that Obama and Dems were doing five years ago and supporting a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage. One is just kinda gutless, the other is an attempt to make intolerance the highest law of the land.

Considering the context of political affiliation and "alleged" liberal, progressive thinking, Obama and the Dems is worse than gutless (it was that, too, fwiw... political and self preservation above all else), it's gutless AND hypocritical.

Heck, if you ask me, waiting until you have just enough support in the polls to push forward with equality seems quite the definition of gutless.

 

[the moops]

Heck, if you ask me, waiting until you have just enough support in the polls to push forward with equality seems quite the definition of gutless.

I think that is exactly what Tobias was saying, wasn't he?

 

[Christo]

The guy looks worse and worse every single day....

President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would restrict marriage to two people of the opposite sex but leave open the possibility that states could allow civil unions. - February 25, 2004

It's not like the Clinton's were so forward thinking on this subject... and how long did it take the Liberal Icon of Obama to provide support?

There's a significant difference between the silly hedging that Obama and Dems were doing five years ago and supporting a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage. One is just kinda gutless, the other is an attempt to make intolerance the highest law of the land.

The Defense of Marriage Act wasn't the law of the land?

 

[timschochet]

The guy looks worse and worse every single day....

President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would restrict marriage to two people of the opposite sex but leave open the possibility that states could allow civil unions. - February 25, 2004

It's not like the Clinton's were so forward thinking on this subject... and how long did it take the Liberal Icon of Obama to provide support?

There's a significant difference between the silly hedging that Obama and Dems were doing five years ago and supporting a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage. One is just kinda gutless, the other is an attempt to make intolerance the highest law of the land.

Considering the context of political affiliation and "alleged" liberal, progressive thinking, Obama and the Dems is worse than gutless (it was that, too, fwiw... political and self preservation above all else), it's gutless AND hypocritical.

Heck, if you ask me, waiting until you have just enough support in the polls to push forward with equality seems quite the definition of gutless.

But isn't that what the Supreme Court is doing? They seem anxious not to make any decisions in advance of changing public opinion.

 

[the rover]

The guy looks worse and worse every single day....

President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would restrict marriage to two people of the opposite sex but leave open the possibility that states could allow civil unions. - February 25, 2004

It's not like the Clinton's were so forward thinking on this subject... and how long did it take the Liberal Icon of Obama to provide support?

There's a significant difference between the silly hedging that Obama and Dems were doing five years ago and supporting a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage. One is just kinda gutless, the other is an attempt to make intolerance the highest law of the land.

Considering the context of political affiliation and "alleged" liberal, progressive thinking, Obama and the Dems is worse than gutless (it was that, too, fwiw... political and self preservation above all else), it's gutless AND hypocritical.

Heck, if you ask me, waiting until you have just enough support in the polls to push forward with equality seems quite the definition of gutless.

But isn't that what the Supreme Court is doing? They seem anxious not to make any decisions in advance of changing public opinion.

yeah, the supremes are afraid of not being reelected.

 

[timschochet]

The guy looks worse and worse every single day....

President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would restrict marriage to two people of the opposite sex but leave open the possibility that states could allow civil unions. - February 25, 2004

It's not like the Clinton's were so forward thinking on this subject... and how long did it take the Liberal Icon of Obama to provide support?

There's a significant difference between the silly hedging that Obama and Dems were doing five years ago and supporting a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage. One is just kinda gutless, the other is an attempt to make intolerance the highest law of the land.

Considering the context of political affiliation and "alleged" liberal, progressive thinking, Obama and the Dems is worse than gutless (it was that, too, fwiw... political and self preservation above all else), it's gutless AND hypocritical.

Heck, if you ask me, waiting until you have just enough support in the polls to push forward with equality seems quite the definition of gutless.

But isn't that what the Supreme Court is doing? They seem anxious not to make any decisions in advance of changing public opinion.

yeah, the supremes are afraid of not being reelected.

Well, they shouldn't be. But everything I read on this subject says that they are being cautious not to get too ahead of public opinion. I don't quite understand that myself- it would seem to me that it is their job to interpret the Constitution, and not to worry about what the public thinks. But apparently that is not the case.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

The guy looks worse and worse every single day....

President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would restrict marriage to two people of the opposite sex but leave open the possibility that states could allow civil unions. - February 25, 2004

It's not like the Clinton's were so forward thinking on this subject... and how long did it take the Liberal Icon of Obama to provide support?

There's a significant difference between the silly hedging that Obama and Dems were doing five years ago and supporting a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage. One is just kinda gutless, the other is an attempt to make intolerance the highest law of the land.

Obama and Clinton and plenty of other Dems supported federal legislation making gay marriage illegal.

If we're pointing back to 2004, the Democrats didn't have the moral high ground then. They've gained it to some extent since then.

 

[Eminence]

I'm sorry for any disparaging remarks I have made or insinuating about homosexuals. I don't hate them or anything absurd like that, it's just kind of one of those things like you'd prefer your daughter not date a black guy.

It's not politically correct to think but deep down you know there is credence to the way you think but one person can't change the world.

I'm taking a break from posting on these boards and I figure some of you guys actually are gay and I'd like to apologize if I ever offended you.

 

[cstu]

I'm sorry for any disparaging remarks I have made or insinuating about homosexuals. I don't hate them or anything absurd like that, it's just kind of one of those things like you'd prefer your daughter not date a black guy.

It's not politically correct to think but deep down you know there is credence to the way you think but one person can't change the world.

I'm taking a break from posting on these boards and I figure some of you guys actually are gay and I'd like to apologize if I ever offended you.

 

[jon_mx]

I'm sorry for any disparaging remarks I have made or insinuating about homosexuals. I don't hate them or anything absurd like that, it's just kind of one of those things like you'd prefer your daughter not date a black guy.

It's not politically correct to think but deep down you know there is credence to the way you think but one person can't change the world.

I'm taking a break from posting on these boards and I figure some of you guys actually are gay and I'd like to apologize if I ever offended you.

Shall we take that as you accepting his appology?

 

[njherdfan]

The guy looks worse and worse every single day....

President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would restrict marriage to two people of the opposite sex but leave open the possibility that states could allow civil unions. - February 25, 2004

It's not like the Clinton's were so forward thinking on this subject... and how long did it take the Liberal Icon of Obama to provide support?

There's a significant difference between the silly hedging that Obama and Dems were doing five years ago and supporting a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage. One is just kinda gutless, the other is an attempt to make intolerance the highest law of the land.

Considering the context of political affiliation and "alleged" liberal, progressive thinking, Obama and the Dems is worse than gutless (it was that, too, fwiw... political and self preservation above all else), it's gutless AND hypocritical.

Heck, if you ask me, waiting until you have just enough support in the polls to push forward with equality seems quite the definition of gutless.

But isn't that what the Supreme Court is doing? They seem anxious not to make any decisions in advance of changing public opinion.

yeah, the supremes are afraid of not being reelected.

Well, they shouldn't be. But everything I read on this subject says that they are being cautious not to get too ahead of public opinion. I don't quite understand that myself- it would seem to me that it is their job to interpret the Constitution, and not to worry about what the public thinks. But apparently that is not the case.

 

[njherdfan]

So... did the court refuse to hear any of the cases because they're waiting for a better one to come along? Or are they just going to consider the matter settled as long as there are no conflicting rulings in the lower counts?

(I realize the SC doesn't generally explain why they deny cert, but am hoping some of the law-talkin' guys on here might have an educated guess.)

Currently there's no circuit split. All of the Courts of Appeal that have heard the issue have ruled the same way. Generally, but not always, the SC won't take a case if there's been unanimity below it. If one of the COA rules differently then the Supreme Court might take the case. The court where that's most likely to happen is the Fifth Circuit, which covers TX, LA, and MS, and is filled with a majority of Republican nominees.

 

[fatness]

I'm sorry for any disparaging remarks I have made or insinuating about homosexuals. I don't hate them or anything absurd like that, it's just kind of one of those things like you'd prefer your daughter not date a black guy.

It's not politically correct to think but deep down you know there is credence to the way you think

Or it might be diarrhea.

 

[roadkill1292]

I'm sorry for any disparaging remarks I have made or insinuating about homosexuals. I don't hate them or anything absurd like that, it's just kind of one of those things like you'd prefer your daughter not date a black guy.

It's not politically correct to think but deep down you know there is credence to the way you think but one person can't change the world.

I'm taking a break from posting on these boards and I figure some of you guys actually are gay and I'd like to apologize if I ever offended you.

Our gay posters are fabulous.

 

[3C's]

Is traditional marriage ruined yet?

Only a matter of time until someone marries their dog.

 

[Koya]

The guy looks worse and worse every single day....

President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would restrict marriage to two people of the opposite sex but leave open the possibility that states could allow civil unions. - February 25, 2004

It's not like the Clinton's were so forward thinking on this subject... and how long did it take the Liberal Icon of Obama to provide support?

There's a significant difference between the silly hedging that Obama and Dems were doing five years ago and supporting a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage. One is just kinda gutless, the other is an attempt to make intolerance the highest law of the land.

Considering the context of political affiliation and "alleged" liberal, progressive thinking, Obama and the Dems is worse than gutless (it was that, too, fwiw... political and self preservation above all else), it's gutless AND hypocritical.

Heck, if you ask me, waiting until you have just enough support in the polls to push forward with equality seems quite the definition of gutless.

But isn't that what the Supreme Court is doing? They seem anxious not to make any decisions in advance of changing public opinion.

I suppose you could argue that, although as a non elected judiciary body its a somewhat different perspective, one that calls not for leadership but interpretation of law and that does evolve with the change of custom and social mores.

 

[joffer]

I'm sorry for any disparaging remarks I have made or insinuating about homosexuals. I don't hate them or anything absurd like that, it's just kind of one of those things like you'd prefer your daughter not date a black guy.

It's not politically correct to think but deep down you know there is credence to the way you think but one person can't change the world.

I'm taking a break from posting on these boards and I figure some of you guys actually are gay and I'd like to apologize if I ever offended you.

you need serious help

 

[trogg78]

I'm sorry for any disparaging remarks I have made or insinuating about homosexuals. I don't hate them or anything absurd like that, it's just kind of one of those things like you'd prefer your daughter not date a black guy.

It's not politically correct to think but deep down you know there is credence to the way you think but one person can't change the world.

I'm taking a break from posting on these boards and I figure some of you guys actually are gay and I'd like to apologize if I ever offended you.

you need serious help

He refuses to accept help because of his superiority over the other inferior humans.

 

[The Commish]

The guy looks worse and worse every single day....

President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would restrict marriage to two people of the opposite sex but leave open the possibility that states could allow civil unions. - February 25, 2004

It's not like the Clinton's were so forward thinking on this subject... and how long did it take the Liberal Icon of Obama to provide support?

There's a significant difference between the silly hedging that Obama and Dems were doing five years ago and supporting a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage. One is just kinda gutless, the other is an attempt to make intolerance the highest law of the land.

Obama and Clinton and plenty of other Dems supported federal legislation making gay marriage illegal.

If we're pointing back to 2004, the Democrats didn't have the moral high ground then. They've gained it to some extent since then.

Have they actually gained though or is it simply that the GOP have fallen off it's collective rocker and the Dems have managed to stay upright?

 

[timschochet]

The guy looks worse and worse every single day....

President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would restrict marriage to two people of the opposite sex but leave open the possibility that states could allow civil unions. - February 25, 2004

It's not like the Clinton's were so forward thinking on this subject... and how long did it take the Liberal Icon of Obama to provide support?

There's a significant difference between the silly hedging that Obama and Dems were doing five years ago and supporting a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage. One is just kinda gutless, the other is an attempt to make intolerance the highest law of the land.

Considering the context of political affiliation and "alleged" liberal, progressive thinking, Obama and the Dems is worse than gutless (it was that, too, fwiw... political and self preservation above all else), it's gutless AND hypocritical.

Heck, if you ask me, waiting until you have just enough support in the polls to push forward with equality seems quite the definition of gutless.

But isn't that what the Supreme Court is doing? They seem anxious not to make any decisions in advance of changing public opinion.

I suppose you could argue that, although as a non elected judiciary body its a somewhat different perspective, one that calls not for leadership but interpretation of law and that does evolve with the change of custom and social mores.

i don't see it as very different. Obama if he was being 100% honest would likely tell you, "I was for gay marriage all along but the public wasn't ready for it." Furthermore he might have argued that had he pushed for it in 2009, the backlash could have slowed things down. So he was being pragmatic and calculating- that doesn't necessarily make him cowardly. The Supremes appear to be doing the same thing. At some point in the future they'll likely rule that gay marriage is a federal right. But it seems as though they want that decision put off until it's already been accepted by society in most states.

 

[pollardsvision]

The guy looks worse and worse every single day....

President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would restrict marriage to two people of the opposite sex but leave open the possibility that states could allow civil unions. - February 25, 2004

It's not like the Clinton's were so forward thinking on this subject... and how long did it take the Liberal Icon of Obama to provide support?

There's a significant difference between the silly hedging that Obama and Dems were doing five years ago and supporting a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage. One is just kinda gutless, the other is an attempt to make intolerance the highest law of the land.

Considering the context of political affiliation and "alleged" liberal, progressive thinking, Obama and the Dems is worse than gutless (it was that, too, fwiw... political and self preservation above all else), it's gutless AND hypocritical.

Heck, if you ask me, waiting until you have just enough support in the polls to push forward with equality seems quite the definition of gutless.

But isn't that what the Supreme Court is doing? They seem anxious not to make any decisions in advance of changing public opinion.

I suppose you could argue that, although as a non elected judiciary body its a somewhat different perspective, one that calls not for leadership but interpretation of law and that does evolve with the change of custom and social mores.

i don't see it as very different. Obama if he was being 100% honest would likely tell you, "I was for gay marriage all along but the public wasn't ready for it." Furthermore he might have argued that had he pushed for it in 2009, the backlash could have slowed things down. So he was being pragmatic and calculating- that doesn't necessarily make him cowardly. The Supremes appear to be doing the same thing. At some point in the future they'll likely rule that gay marriage is a federal right. But it seems as though they want that decision put off until it's already been accepted by society in most states.

Yeah, it's not much different than the marijuana issue.

You really can't be a trailblazing politician when a huge chunk of the population is still hanging on to some really stupid beliefs that aren't supported by any sort of reason.

And you're right that Obama making a bigger push would've led to a bigger backlash.

 

[Todd Andrews]

KooKCrazy

 

[fatness]

I'm sorry for any disparaging remarks I have made or insinuating about homosexuals. I don't hate them or anything absurd like that, it's just kind of one of those things like you'd prefer your daughter not date a black guy.

It's not politically correct to think but deep down you know there is credence to the way you think but one person can't change the world.

I'm taking a break from posting on these boards and I figure some of you guys actually are gay and I'd like to apologize if I ever offended you.

you need serious help

He refuses to accept help because of his superiority over the other inferior humans.

He actually represents a large voting block: young; stupid; blaming his problems on others who look, worship, or screw differently.

 

[simey]

Gay marriage is now legal in North Carolina.

RALEIGH, N.C. —A federal judge in North Carolina has struck down the state's gay marriage ban, opening the way for the first same-sex weddings in the state to begin immediately.

U.S. District Court Judge Max O. Cogburn Jr. in Asheville issued a ruling Friday shortly after 5 p.m. declaring the ban approved by state voters in 2012 unconstitutional.

Buncombe County Register of Deeds Drew Reisinger kept his Asheville office open late to begin issuing marriage licenses to waiting couples. Cogburn's ruling follows Monday's announcement by the U.S. Supreme Court that it would not hear any appeal of a July ruling by the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond striking down Virginia's ban. That court has jurisdiction over North Carolina.

 

[njherdfan]

I'm sorry for any disparaging remarks I have made or insinuating about homosexuals. I don't hate them or anything absurd like that, it's just kind of one of those things like you'd prefer your daughter not date a black guy.

It's not politically correct to think but deep down you know there is credence to the way you think but one person can't change the world.

I'm taking a break from posting on these boards and I figure some of you guys actually are gay and I'd like to apologize if I ever offended you.

you need serious help

He refuses to accept help because of his superiority over the other inferior humans.

He actually represents a large voting block: young; stupid; blaming his problems on others who look, worship, or screw differently.

I think we're the ones actually leading the charge for gay marriage.

 

[fatness]

He actually represents a large voting block: young; stupid; blaming his problems on others who look, worship, or screw differently.

I think we're the ones actually leading the charge for gay marriage.

You're probably right regarding "young".

 

[fatness]

There's a ton of money, millions of dollars I'd guess, available for legal fights against gay marriage. But with the unending string of beatdowns that gay marriage opponents have taken in court there are fewer and fewer opportunities to fight it. A lot of the legal wrangling now seems like last-ditch requests for halting particular clerks of the court from issuing marriage licenses in states where gay marriage opponents have already lost the battle.

So where's the money going to go? Probably not much of it to little "delay this court clerk" actions. I'd guess more will go into the upcoming elections, to support candidates who want to put gay people back in their place by "fighting for traditional marriage". And some of them will get elected, and they'll propose and pass some laws, and the laws will get struck down. But those candidates will get re-elected.

Maybe we'll see new laws like those restricting abortion. Maybe they'll propose something like Virginia did for abortions, to stick a probe into a bodily orifice of gay people applying for licenses, to see if they're really gay. Or waiting periods where they're required to read literature describing their abominable desires and eventual roasting in hell.

 

[cstu]

Alaska

Same-sex marriage ban overturned

A federal judge has struck down Alaska’s first-in-the-nation ban on same-sex marriage.

U.S. District Judge Timothy Burgess said Sunday that the ban violates the U.S. constitutional guarantee of due process and equal protection.

The state could appeal to the 9th Circuit Court, where chances of it winning would be slim because the federal appeals court ­already has ruled against Idaho and Nevada, which made similar arguments.

Five gay couples sued the state of Alaska to overturn a constitutional amendment approved by voters in 1998 that defined marriage as being between one man and one woman.

 

[the moops]

pick a new battle folks. you lost this one

 

[NCCommish]

pick a new battle folks. you lost this one

29 states and counting. Added NC to the list and they will start issuing licenses next week. Take that Prop whatever.

 

[fatness]

pick a new battle folks. you lost this one

There's still a lot of anger and money that will be spent on this one.

 

[matuski]

I'm sorry for any disparaging remarks I have made or insinuating about homosexuals. I don't hate them or anything absurd like that, it's just kind of one of those things like you'd prefer your daughter not date a black guy.

It's not politically correct to think but deep down you know there is credence to the way you think but one person can't change the world.

I'm taking a break from posting on these boards and I figure some of you guys actually are gay and I'd like to apologize if I ever offended you.

you need serious help

He refuses to accept help because of his superiority over the other inferior humans.

He actually represents a large voting block: young; stupid; blaming his problems on others who look, worship, or screw differently.

In this case I think it is Em trying too hard to make others think he isn't when maybe he is.

 

[the moops]

pick a new battle folks. you lost this one

There's still a lot of anger and money that will be spent on this one.

Wasted anger and wasted money. It's amazing that they can't figure that out

 

[fatness]

pick a new battle folks. you lost this one

There's still a lot of anger and money that will be spent on this one.

Wasted anger and wasted money. It's amazing that they can't figure that out

Never understimate the power of righteous indignation, and of taking advantage of righteous indignation for personal and political gain.

 

[jon_mx]

pick a new battle folks. you lost this one

There's still a lot of anger and money that will be spent on this one.

Wasted anger and wasted money. It's amazing that they can't figure that out

Never understimate the power of righteous indignation, and of taking advantage of righteous indignation for personal and political gain.

Ironically, 90 percent on the righteous indignation in this thread is on the pro-gay marriage side.

 

[fatness]

Sure it is.

 

[fatness]

Once upon a time there were two cousins, Jessica and Robby. They grew up together in the warm and wet Mississippi back lands. They swam, they fished and Jessica loved and respected her cousin. He gave her the sense of understanding family and loyalty.

That sense of family and loyalty was upended completely recently when Robby recently ran to the American Family Association — an entity defined by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a “hate” organization — to get their help in humiliating and attacking Jessica’s marriage. Robby has never met Jessica’s husband.

Jessica and her husband, Nick, are legally married. Nick is a transgender male. A mutual friend introduced them a few years ago.

Jessica states:

“Nick has been my best friend since day one. We can always count on the other one during the hardest times in life. While he was in paramedic school, Nick felt my full encouragement through the whole way and I never gave up on his dream with him. We stand by each other through every thing just as a husband and wife should. I know at the end of the day I can count on him and that’s what real romance looks like. Our love is the kind some people only dream about and I’m very lucky to be able to say I found that in this life with him.”

On the afternoon of September 23, Jessica got a private message from her cousin Robby out of the blue. It said: “Jessica, I want you to know that I love you both as a person and as my family. You hand I practically grew up together, and I don’t want you to think that I am angry with you. But I have to tell you that what you and Nick are doing is wrong, and I am going to be doing all that I can to challenge it. I realize this might upset you, but I have to do what is right as difficult as it is going to be.”

Jessica had no idea what he meant about “challenging it,” but she was soon to find out.

That evening, Robby posted this to his Facebook wall: “Last week I learned of a same sex marriage that took place right here in the state of Mississippi. Two females, one of which is a family member of mine, applied for and was granted an official marriage license in Desoto county. One of the partners poses as a man and managed to obtain a driver’s license that legally identified her as a male. I would like to urge all Mississippians who are outraged to join me. This is a battle that has come to us and we cannot afford to lose traditional marriage.”

Then he then gave the phone numbers of the attorney general, lieutenant governor and the governor.

Around midnight, Jessica received another private message from a woman she had never met.

“You need to see this video,” the message said. The video was her cousin Robby on a show with the AFA’s Bryan Fisher. Bryan Fisher is infamous for homophobic statements that include the encouragement of the kidnapping of children from LGBT families. They were making public Jessica and Nick’s names, implying that they were criminals, that their marriage was a fraud scheme and stating out and out lies as fact.

“The video makes it seem like we did all of this to pull one over on the state of Mississippi, and that’s nowhere close to the truth.” Jessica said. “Mine is not an illegal marriage in any state, because it is not a same sex union at all. That is not legal in this state, and there is no ‘loop hole’ for that to be possible. Nick actually transitioned from female to male, and had his name and gender legally changed complete with birth certificate, social security card, drivers license, and all medical licenses. After all of that was completed we were able to apply for our marriage license and got married, the same as any other opposite gender couple.”

Bryan Fisher characterizes Jessica and Nick as two lesbians, one of which had a hormone shot, and then fraudulently had records changed.

righteous indignation

 

[TheIronSheik]

I'm all for equality, but marriage is really just a word. How much money has been wasted on trying to be able to take on a term?