XPost: alt.law-enforcement, alt.atheism, talk.politics.guns   
   XPost: alt.survival   
   From: davidjhughes.tx@netzero.com   
      
   On 9/24/2014 10:12 AM, Wayne wrote:   
   >   
   >   
   > "David J. Hughes"  wrote in message news:HdzUv.240259$JH1.29846@fx08.iad...   
   >   
   > On 9/23/2014 12:57 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:   
   >> On 9/23/2014 11:27 AM, Lee wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> La. state judge: Gay marriage ban unconstitutional   
   >>> Sept 22 2014   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Louisiana's ban on same-sex marriage is   
   >>> unconstitutional, in part because it   
   >>> violates equal protection rights, a state   
   >>> judge ruled Monday.   
   >>   
   >> Protection of what right?   
   >>   
   >   
   > # Fourteenth Amendment, section one   
   > # "1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to   
   > # the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the   
   > # State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which   
   > # shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United   
   > # States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or   
   > # property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its   
   > # jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."   
   >   
   > # Contract laws, of which marriage laws are a subset, should not   
   > # discriminate on anything other than the ability to consent or enter into   
   > # a valid contract.   
   >   
   > Nice cite.  Too bad it isn't relevant except in the strange minds of   
   > proggies.   
   >   
   > Assume that man A has the right to marry a woman, and man B has the   
   > right to marry a woman.   
   >   
   > In what weird world of logic does that mean that man A has a right to   
   > marry man B?   
   >   
      
   Ninth Amendment "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights,   
   shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."   
      
   As the Constitution does not mention the right of a man to marry a   
   woman, that right has the same constitutional standing as the right of a   
   man to marry a man, or a woman to marry a woman, which is none.   
   That is not to say that the right does not exist, just that the USC   
   doesn't address it.   
      
   The Court's decision lies in the area of "privileges and immunities" as   
   well as "equal protection"   
   If the law grants protections and privileges to someone simply because   
   they are married, or in a civil union, to someone of a different gender,   
   (which it does), it needs to grant those same protections and privileges   
   to anyone who is married, or in a civil union, to someone of the same   
   gender.   
      
      
   >   
   >   
   >>   
   >>> Judge Edward Rubin said the ban violated   
   >>> the 14th Amendment and the constitutional   
   >>> requirement that states give "full faith   
   >>> and credit" to each other's laws. His   
   >>> ruling came in same-sex adoption case of   
   >>> Angela Costanza and her partner, Chasity   
   >>> Brewer.   
   >>   
   >> And will also allow 12 year old children to cross State lines to get   
   >> abortions without Parental consent and notification?   
   >   
   > Legally? No, a 12 year old would need a court order to have such a   
   > medical procedure done without parental consent, and the court would   
   > notify the parents.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> It will also allow children to get married at ages 14 and maybe even 12   
   >> with no parental consent.   
   >   
   > The minimum age for marriage in any of the US states without parental,   
   > or judicial in the case of wards of the Court, consent is 18, 21 in   
   > Mississippi.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> That will make pedophilia a legal process and a legal form of marriage.   
   >> So that by legalizing gay marriage this way, the judge has also   
   >> unwittingly "or maybe on purpose" made pedophilia marriages a nation   
   >> wide reality.  Thank you Liberals for unleashing those sexual predators   
   >> on the children of America.   
   >>   
   >> So someone Male or Female (As in teachers that want to marry their   
   >> students) will be able to coax a child away from home to get married and   
   >> fulfill the pedophile dream of "legal sex" with a child.  And thanks to   
   >> easy divorce in some other States the children can be divorced and the   
   >> pedophile can move on to their next child victim in a few years after   
   >> the child no longer sexually excites the pedophile.   
   >>   
   >   
   > The minimum age of sexual consent in any US state is 16, in nearly all   
   > it is 18. Any adult trying this would end up in prison, and on the sex   
   > offenders list for the rest of their lives.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> This Judge should be scrutinized for child porn and child sex to see if   
   >> they are also a pedophile or is this just a really High IQ Liberal judge   
   >> that can't understand the law like Obama is a really high IQ Liberal   
   >> constitutional lawyer that can't understand the constitution.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>> http://www.shreveporttimes.com/story/news/local/louisiana/2014/09/22/la-   
   >>> state-judge-gay-marriage-ban-unconstitutional/16073451/   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)