Utah's 10th Circuit Filing "Because we say So!" (link)

[_The Mighty Builder]

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=28598877&nid=96 ... d=queue-19

Utah has the constitutional authority to define marriage as between a man and a woman and that union is the best setting in which to have and rear children, attorneys for the state argue in an appeals court brief filed just before midnight Monday.

They also contend that traditional marriage furthers the state's interests in accommodating religious freedom and reducing the potential for civic strife.

"Redefining marriage as a genderless, adult-centric institution would fundamentally change Utah's child-centered meaning and purpose of marriage," according to a 120-page brief filed in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.


In other words, get ready for your fertility test to get a Marriage License in Utah. Make them Babies, baby!!!

Marriage IS NOT FOR Recreational SEX! Only Baby Making.

[_EmilyAnn]

If this is the substance of their legal argument...it's NOTHING!!!

Every point they make is either nonsensical ("reducing the potential for civic strife"), or legally absurd ("Redefining marriage as a[n]...adult-centric institution."

This "legal" argument to the 10th Circuit is ridiculous!!!

[_Equality]

I read most of the main briefs in the big marriage-equality cases, and it is striking how the quality of the briefs from those opposing marriage equality is diminishing over time. This is one of the worst I have read (the one the church filed yesterday in the Nevada case at the Ninth Circuit was better then this piece of crap; not that it was good, just better than this Scheisse). They actually argue (at length) that affording same-sex unions the dignity of legal recognition will cause heterosexuals to have fewer children, which in turn will cause disruption to the economy. And I think it borders on sanctionable conduct for them to twist Loving the way they do. They cannot possibly believe that will be persuasive to the Tenth Circuit (and certainly not to Justice Kennedy if it gets that far).

[_The Mighty Builder]

If this is the substance of their legal argument...it's NOTHING!!!

Every point they make is either nonsensical ("reducing the potential for civic strife"), or legally absurd ("Redefining marriage as a[n]...adult-centric institution."

This "legal" argument to the 10th Circuit is ridiculous!!!

What is worse, is that every argument was made in the California debacle to include the Baby Making argument.

$200,000.00 for a cut a paste brief that has already been ruled as STUPID!!!!

[_Equality]

[
What is worse, is that every argument was made in the California debacle to include the Baby Making argument.

$200,000.00 for a cut a paste brief that has already been ruled as STUPID!!!!

It truly is a cut-and-paste brief. Whoever wrote the first part did not write the last. We could get the Johnson brothers on it. The dreadful social-science portion of the brief is obviously lifted from the briefs that Monte Stewart has written in the past. It is obvious because the first part of the brief uses the term "same-sex marriage" and the latter part of the brief shifts to the noxious term "genderless marriage."

[_moksha]

As far as the states concerned what is the point of marriage?

For the State it is to make a fee off every marriage license sold. From a religious point of view it is to solemnize the union of this happy couple. For the LDS Church and the State of Utah, it is to obey the Proclamation on the Family. For Jareds it is to sell wedding rings.