It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: La. Court OKs Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 02:44 PM
link   
The Louisiana Supreme court struck down the ruling by a state district judge that the states anti-gay-marriage amendment was unconstitutional. The amendment was ruled unconstitutional because of a provision disallowing other legal arrangements similar to marriage for unmarried persons. The Supreme court ruled that the provision was relevant to the "defense of marriage."
 



[url=http://www.comcast.net/News/DOMESTIC//XML/1110_AP_Online_Regional___National__US_/ec3e7064-43a1-43e6-b283-17fff15698fa.html]www.comcast.net[/url ]
The Louisiana Supreme Court on Wednesday unanimously reinstated the anti-gay marriage amendment to the state constitution that was overwhelmingly approved by voters in September.

The high court reversed a state district judge's ruling in October striking down the amendment on the grounds that it violated a provision of the state constitution requiring that an amendment cover only one subject.

"Each provision of the amendment is germane to the single object of defense of marriage and constitutes an element of the plan advanced to achieve this object," the high court said.

The court's ruling puts the amendment in the constitution.




Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


While it is my opinion that the issue of same-sex marriage is best handled at the state level, I still have problems with defining social institutions in constitutions. I also believe that legally binding contracts should be available for any two persons for the purposes of property and inheritance rights, regardless of the quality of the relationship between those individuals. Louisiana, especially New Orleans, has a very large and vocal gay community. The social effects of this ruling are bound to reverberate for a long time to come, as it probably sets back the "gay rights movement" considerably.




posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 03:24 PM
link   
As if that don't beat all, Read here


This is unfortunate in my opinion. I say to each their own. Having variations on the definitions for marriage does not impact my personal definition one bit.



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 03:24 PM
link   
How can an amendment to the constitution be unconstitutional???



[edit on 1/19/2005 by djohnsto77]



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 03:44 PM
link   
Thanks for the post Grady.

Many members here already know how I feel about the situation!



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 03:49 PM
link   

I also believe that legally binding contracts should be available for any two persons for the purposes of property and inheritance rights, regardless of the quality of the relationship between those individuals.


I think that the statement you made is a good one. However I am dubious of your use of the word "quality" within it.

Can you explain to me why you used that word?

Thanks.

[edit on 19-1-2005 by Kriz_4]



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 04:41 PM
link   
I'm so proud: my home state has just legitimized discrimination. Of all the problems Louisiana faces right now, *this* is the issue on which they're spending their time and money?

Go ahead: ask me how many of my high school friends are now on their 2nd, 3rd, or even 4th marriage (all of them heterosexual, so the sanctity of marriage is not at risk). Ask me how many of them have illegitimate children (some of 'em born while we were still in high school). Ask me how many of them live below the poverty line. Ask me how many local businesses in my hometown are boarded up.

The whole damn state is slipping into the third world, but why worry about that? As long as gay people can't get married, all is right in the world.



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kriz_4
I think that the statement you made is a good one. However I am dubious of your use of the word "quality" within it.

Can you explain to me why you used that word?


It means that such contracts would be available to those who wish to enter into them, regardless of whether or not they have sex with one another, or even live together, for that matter.

[edit on 05/1/19 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
How can an amendment to the constitution be unconstitutional???
[edit on 1/19/2005 by djohnsto77]


If I remember correctly - any amendment to the Louisiana constitution can only cover one issue. The amendment passed by voters had two purposes: 1) to define marriage as between a man and a woman AND to prohibit the State from recognizing any legal status between two unmarried persons.

Really disappointing ruling IMO. I may not agree with States defining marriage in such a manner, but I can live with it. But to actually penalize people who choose not to get married by denying them any legal recognition or protection is just the worse kind of discrimination.

B.



posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Okay, all this talk on like gays is annoying. Love is Love. It dosent matter if they are the same sex. I am not against same sex marriage, or same sex love.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join