Federal judge hears legal arguments on same-sex marriage

Jul 24, 2012 | Posted by: Rick in Kansas | Full story: www.staradvertiser.com

Senior U.S. Judge Alan Kay heard arguments for more than two hours today, and will decide later whether Hawaii laws reserving marriage between a man and woman violate the U.S. Constitution.

Comments
1 - 20 of 20 Comments Last updated Jul 26, 2012

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Jul 25, 2012
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Crossing everything that can be crossed.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Jul 25, 2012
 
Hawaii & Illinois are likely the next states to approve marriage equality.

Not much else happening this summer; just waiting for the SCOTUS action on DOMA & Prop 8, and of course the ballot questions in Maine, Maryland, Washington, & Minnesota in Nov.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Jul 25, 2012
 

Judged:

1

WeTheSheeple wrote:
Hawaii & Illinois are likely the next states to approve marriage equality.
Not much else happening this summer; just waiting for the SCOTUS action on DOMA & Prop 8, and of course the ballot questions in Maine, Maryland, Washington, & Minnesota in Nov.
I'm not familiar with the Hawaii case, but being heard in federal courts it seems like it would run into problems with Baker v Nelson, so it might not get anywhere fast.

In addition to the case in state court in Illinois, there are cases in New Jersey and Minnesota likely to be heard this summer as well, plus there are the Texas divorce cases that are still in the system that we haven't heard from in awhile.
Jack

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Jul 25, 2012
 
Wow Im 245 pound Gay weightlifter from the Soutfside of Arizona actually I lift small animals up onto my small pecker. Hawaii thats not very Aloha Ya'll just saying.
stupid people suck

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Jul 25, 2012
 
Jack, go trolling in your Phoenix shythole and leave us Honolulu folk be.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Jul 25, 2012
 
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>I'm not familiar with the Hawaii case, but being heard in federal courts it seems like it would run into problems with Baker v Nelson, so it might not get anywhere fast.
In addition to the case in state court in Illinois, there are cases in New Jersey and Minnesota likely to be heard this summer as well, plus there are the Texas divorce cases that are still in the system that we haven't heard from in awhile.
Good point on the lawsuit, but I was just speaking in general terms about Hawaii & Illinois. The Gov in Hawaii supports marriage equality and there will be a push next year to pass a marriage equality bill through the legislature; same goes for Illinois.

Since: May 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Jul 25, 2012
 
stupid people suck wrote:
Jack, go trolling in your Phoenix shythole and leave us Honolulu folk be.
Look where he's posting from. HONOLULU.

Since: May 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Jul 25, 2012
 
Who cares if they get married? The state makes money selling the license, and the lawyers make money on divorces. They don't have welfare babies, and they die of AIDS. Where's the downside?

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Jul 25, 2012
 
“As irrational prejudice plainly never constitutes a legitimate government interest, this court must hold that Section 3 of DOMA as applied to Plaintiffs violates the equal protection principles embodied in the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.” He later stayed the implementation of his decision pending appeal and the Department of Justice (DOJ) entered an appeal on October 12, 2010. While the plaintiffs had asked Tauro to find that sexual orientation was a suspect class and therefore properly treated with strict scrutiny, Tauro found that Section 3 was unconstitutional on rational basis grounds. He did not address the question of whether heightened scrutiny was warranted. Tauro issued a decision in Massachusetts v. US Department of Health and Human Services, which found the same provision of DOMA on the same day he released his opinion in Gill. Tauro entered his final judgment–a document developed in consultation with the parties to the case–on August 18 and granted a stay for the duration of the appeals process. http://www.apa.org/about/offices/ogc/amicus/g...

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Jul 25, 2012
 
"The Court finds that neither Congress' claimed legislative justifications nor any of the proposed reasons proffered by BLAG constitute bases rationally related to any of the alleged governmental interests. Further, after concluding that neither the law nor the record can sustain any of the interests suggested, the Court, having tried on its own, cannot conceive of any additional interests that DOMA might further."

"Prejudice, we are beginning to understand, rises not from malice or hostile animus alone. It may result as well from insensitivity caused by simple want of careful, rational reflection or from some instinctive mechanism to guard against people who appear to be different in some respects from ourselves."

Conclusion: DOMA, as it relates to Golinski's case, "violates her right to equal protection of the law under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution" and "the statute fails to satisfy heightened scrutiny and is unconstitutional as applied to Ms. Golinski."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi...
Lethal problem

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Jul 25, 2012
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Joe Balls wrote:
Who cares if they get married? The state makes money selling the license, and the lawyers make money on divorces. They don't have welfare babies, and they die of AIDS. Where's the downside?
The problem is they spread their AIDS and breed more gays by molesting little boys and also children should not be exposed to their bizarre, abnormal, immoral relationship. Kids are very impressionable and mimic what adults do.
Help

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Jul 25, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

Is it just me or are these gays coming out of the woodwork? They're freaking everywhere!!
Oh boy

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Jul 25, 2012
 

Judged:

1

I know what you mean. I have 6 or 7 of them in my workplace.

Since: May 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Jul 25, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Lethal problem wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem is they spread their AIDS and breed more gays by molesting little boys and also children should not be exposed to their bizarre, abnormal, immoral relationship. Kids are very impressionable and mimic what adults do.
Molesting kids has always been against the law, nothing about this new stuff will make it legal. Just look at the Sandusky case. How old were those "boys" anyways, twenty? "Coach, if you don't stop that in twenty minutes, I'm telling."

Since: May 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Jul 25, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Help wrote:
Is it just me or are these gays coming out of the woodwork? They're freaking everywhere!!


Yes, and the feminine panty-bois all seem to work at Jamba Juice. I just hope they aren't adding any "boost" to my Razzamatazz.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Jul 25, 2012
 
Help wrote:
Is it just me or are these gays coming out of the woodwork? They're freaking everywhere!!
That's because being sneaky didn't work out as well as we hoped.

:)

Since: Mar 07

The entire US of A

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Jul 25, 2012
 
Oh boy wrote:
I know what you mean. I have 6 or 7 of them in my workplace.
Guess what? If there are 6 or seven people you can spot as gay, that means there are at least 20 that show no visible signs.

You are SURROUNDED!!!

Since: Mar 07

The entire US of A

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Jul 25, 2012
 
Lethal problem wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem is they spread ......
Silly troll. You can't do any better than that?
Jack

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Jul 26, 2012
 
Joe Balls wrote:
<quoted text>
Molesting kids has always been against the law, nothing about this new stuff will make it legal. Just look at the Sandusky case. How old were those "boys" anyways, twenty? "Coach, if you don't stop that in twenty minutes, I'm telling."
Dont Judge him, he said he loved me! When I was little, Big Sand taught me how to swim at the pond, when I asked him "why he had to put his finger in my butt, when I tried to thread water? and he said: "Well if I take my finger out, Little Jack you'll sink?
See how thoughtful?
Strawberry shortcake

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Jul 26, 2012
 
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Guess what? If there are 6 or seven people you can spot as gay, that means there are at least 20 that show no visible signs.
You are SURROUNDED!!!
You say that like it's a good thing.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••