And Maine makes it 5 ....

[_Paracelsus]

Maine ?
Europe, Asia, Africa ...




Worldwide church?
US, Utah, Salt Lake City. Do you want to define street and number?

[_JohnStuartMill]

News reports of the oral agrument before the CA Supreme Court made it sound as if the court appeared unlikely to overrule Prop. 8.

Lets hope so. If the people voted, let their voice be heard.

Yes, and when Southern states voted to ban interracial marriage, we should have let their decision stand, too, right?

Wrong. Simple majoritarianism is deeply flawed. You'd think that a member of a religious minority would understand that.

[_RAJ]

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

News reports of the oral agrument before the CA Supreme Court made it sound as if the court appeared unlikely to overrule Prop. 8.

And I agree with the reports. It seems the court was signaling that they would not overturn prop 8, but they would probably vote to uphold the roughly 18,000 existing marriages that took place during the time it was legal for same-sex couples to wed.

I still think voting to strike down prop 8 is a long shot. I just think the landscape has changed enough that its not a foregone conclusion.

[_Brackite]

Do you believe that the U.S. Supreme Court should overturn the Constitutional Ammendments within the 28 or so States (Such as the State of Arizona) [/b]that traditionally define Marriage in their State Constitution as between One Man and One Woman?

I think so, yes.

If so, why?

The equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution, made applicable to the states through the 14th Amendment.

Thanks for the Answers Rollo Tomasi. I don't exactly agree with your Answers, but thanks anyway. I am a Tenth Amendment kind of guy. Here is the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution:

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.

The YES On Proposition 102, Passed with 56.198% of the Votes within the Great State of Arizona.

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

Between one man and one woman

ARTICLE XXX. MARRIAGE

1. Marriage

Section 1. Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.

(Arizona Const. Art. XXX, Section 1) (Proposition 102)

( Link: http://www.domawatch.org/stateissues/arizona/index.html )


The State Constitution of Arizona also Prohibits the Practice of Polygamous Marriages.

( Arizona Constitution: )


(Actually, Proposition 102 also basically Prohibits Polygamous Marriages being recognized, since it States 'one man and one woman' within there.)

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Thanks for the Answers Rollo Tomasi. I don't exactly agree with your Answers, but thanks anyway. I am a Tenth Amendment kind of guy. Here is the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution ....

If the Supreme Court finds a violation of the equal protection clause, I'm afraid the Tenth Amendment won't save any state law. It'll be very interesting to see how the high court rules on this issue one day (and, eventually, the court will have to, in my opinion).

[_rcrocket]

The Eighth Circuit upheld against an equal protection challenge Nebraska's marriage laws here.

There has been no direct challenge to DOMA (the federal act which Clinton signed outlawing gay marriage for federal purposes) by married couples (couples with valid state marriage licenses) until recently, here.

And, yes, the 10th Amendment has been all but read out of the Constitution by the U.S. Supreme Court (but not by right-wing fascist gun nuts), especially when it comes to Equal Protection claims.

[_JohnStuartMill]

Thank God that the Equal Protection Clause has mostly trumped the 10th amendment. Otherwise, who knows what crazy laws Alabama would still be enforcing.

[_Droopy]

LOL. How long have you idiots been prattling on about these being "the last days"?

People like you are living, breathing proof of the assertion, so as long as there are people like you, so long will the warning voice be raised.

I suppose the End Times(tm) were near when the Supreme Court mandated recognition of interracial marriages, too. Or do you not care about what the Prophets of the Lord have commanded?

Oh, there's that analogy between race and sexual predilection again, as if they were similar.

Those libs are so cute, always clowning...

[_JohnStuartMill]

Apparently Droopy doesn't care about what the Prophet of the Lord has commanded, either.

Nobody ever rescinded Brigham Young's interracial ban, Droopy. Nor has the prescription to murder interracial children been taken away. If you were truly a believer in the Mormon Church, you'd be trying to assassinate the President right now. I'm glad, though, that deep down, you know that the Book of Abraham is an indefensible fraud, and that all the stories about gold plates and peepstones are shameless inventions.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

The Eighth Circuit upheld against an equal protection challenge Nebraska's marriage laws here.

I don't find that decision particularly compelling. The appellees were not seeking a right to marry or have civil unions. Rather, they charged that the process (i.e., passage of an amendment rather than a law enacted by the legislature) violated equal protection because their small minority status did not allow an "equal playing field" in terms of influencing members of the legislature. Moreover, the court used a "rational -basis" review (as opposed to a "compelling state interest" review) of the amendment, so it was easy for the gov't to show a good enough reason to keep the amendment.