Indiana ban on gay marriage ruled unconstitutional

[MisterChester]

Judge strikes down Indiana ban on gay marriage - 13 WTHR Indianapolis

Well...

 

[armedindy]

what doesnt kill me makes me straighter

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

"The clerk's office will be open until 4:30 pm Wednesday to issue licenses, and White says she will conduct short, civil ceremonies on a first-come, first-serve basis for a voluntary $50 contribution to the Indiana Youth Group.

"All couples seeking a marriage license will be treated with dignity and respect," said White"



Hurry in for your quicky-free-for-fiddy-dahlah license!!!! With dignity and grace of course.

 

[PistolBob]

Since marriage isn't something the feds are in charge of, per the lack of any specific powers over marriage given to the feds in the US Constitution, I'd tell the judge to cram it. Indiana is appealing the decision by this loonie judge...

Besides...why does any government have the right to tell any of us who we can choose to spend the rest of our lives with?

Lawyers are getting fat over this one....I see some now claim to specialize in same sex divorces....

 

[Liberty Sanders]

Very welcome news.

The better half and I have two lady friends who were planning to get hitched in Iowa and we were planning to attend. It will be WAY cooler to witnesss it here.

 

[CathyInBlue]

Not being a connoisseur of local media, I learned of it here: Judge strikes down Indiana ban on gay marriage | Fox News

This is a great day for Indiana as a whole. Now, we can set aside the wasted time, energy, and money that was flowing into the idiotic amendment and put them to productive work simplifying the tax code, the firearms codes, and the education codes.

Too bad it couldn't happen sooner for IndyGal65's nuptials.

 

[Maximinus Thrax]

I'll celebrate when the .gov gets its nose out of the bedroom. Until then, meh...

 

[Mark 1911]

Another example of the feds trampling on the state. Feds are out of control, nothing new in that department.

 

[CathyInBlue]

Another example of the feds trampling on the state. Feds are out of control, nothing new in that department.

As opposed to states tramping on the Constitutional right of freedom of worship of those whose religious tenets allowed for same-sex nuptials.

 

[Trigger Time]

Great news! It's ridiculous we persecute people still for who they are any can't change. People can disagree with it all they want and like or dislike anyone for any reason, but when you start denying them basic human rights to equality it's persecution and discrimination. I see this issue just like women's suffrage and equality for minorities . No one should have more rights, just equal rights. I'm ashamed our govt treats people unfairly. I promise we will get you equality one day!

 

[Mark 1911]

As opposed to states tramping on the Constitutional right of freedom of worship of those whose religious tenets allowed for same-sex nuptials.

Obviously we are on different frequencies on this topic. I would never associate same-sex nuptials with worship, but then again, it depends on just what is being worshiped. And this is exactly why there will never be harmony on this issue.

 

[shootamc58]

I couldn't care less who someone chooses to be with. Its better that someone can be happy than closeted and potentially ruin a sham marriage down the road. It happened to a family friends daughter. Married with 2 kids and dad comes out of the closet. It really messed up the two kids. Had he been able to be with someone he wanted and not hide who he was, maybe it wouldn't have ruined a family. Let people live their lives and keep the government out of my personal life.

 

[armedindy]

Obviously we are on different frequencies on this topic. I would never associate same-sex nuptials with worship, but then again, it depends on just what is being worshiped. And this is exactly why there will never be harmony on this issue.

i thought freedom of religion meant you could worship who and what you want, and have your own religious rituals and ceremonies.........or was i wrong?

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

Both the state AND the State need to be out of the business of marriage all together.

-J-

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

The government is involved in lots of things it shouldn't, a good number of them considered under the umbrella of "moral issues", none of them should be the focus of government. I hold my opinions on matters of morality, because it doesn't matter. What I think is right or wrong is of no consequence regarding things that do not affect me or anyone else directly.

I wish the courts could also see fit to follow the constitution of the united states. Maybe we'll get around to that later. ...and balance the budget...look into this Iraq/Syria thingy...

 

[88GT]

Great news! It's ridiculous we persecute people still for who they are any can't change. People can disagree with it all they want and like or dislike anyone for any reason, but when you start denying them basic human rights to equality it's persecution and discrimination. I see this issue just like women's suffrage and equality for minorities . No one should have more rights, just equal rights. I'm ashamed our govt treats people unfairly. I promise we will get you equality one day!

Okay, let's get the facts straight.

Gays are not denied legal marriage because they are gay. They are denied legal marriage because marriage is defined as the legal contract between a man and a woman. A gay can still marry. It just has to be someone of the opposite sex. If gays were denied legal marriage because they were gay, they wouldn't be able to marry anyone at any time.

This loosy-goosey language is really bugging me.

That said, the conflation of marriage with the secular spousal contract created by the state is also a big fat red herring.

 

[freekforge]

cool! I don't like the .gov telling me what guns I can own so I cant imagine how it must feel to have them tell you who you can or cannot marry.

 

[Maximinus Thrax]

Both the state AND the State need to be out of the business of marriage all together.

-J-

Why this isn't a more popular opinion I'll never understand...

cool! I don't like the .gov telling me what guns I can own so I cant imagine how it must feel to have them tell you who you can or cannot marry.

Why do we encourage the .gov to care in the first place?

 

[avboiler11]

Some may not realize it...but this ruling is a victory for individual freedom and small government.

 

[CathyInBlue]

Okay, let's get the facts straight.

Gays are not denied legal marriage because they are gay. They are denied legal marriage because marriage is defined as the legal contract between a man and a woman. A gay can still marry. It just has to be someone of the opposite sex. If gays were denied legal marriage because they were gay, they wouldn't be able to marry anyone at any time.

This loosy-goosey language is really bugging me.

That said, the conflation of marriage with the secular spousal contract created by the state is also a big fat red herring.

This is kinda my point. For some, their religious practice allows marriage to encompass same sex marriage, but the government's legal strictures trample on the rights of people of those faith traditions. Which one needs to yield? The religious tenets of a free people, or the regulatory laws of the state? Rewriting the marriage statutes, should such be deemed necessary, would not be a pronouncement on the religious tenets of those whose faith only allows for one-man/one-woman. It would just be a pronouncement that the government will not be establishing that the one-man/one-woman faith traditions be the only religions allowed.