A federal judge has struck down Virginia’s law that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
This law is not simply a law. It is a constitutional amendment approved by the voters.
This comes after Virginia’s liberal Attorney General refused to do his job and defend the law in court.
A federal judge ruled Thursday that Virginia's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.
"Tradition is revered in the Commonwealth, and often rightly so. However, tradition alone cannot justify denying same-sex couples the right to marry any more than it could justify Virginia's ban on interracial marriage," Judge Arenda Wright Allen wrote in a 41-page opinion (posted here).
Ruling on a lawsuit brought by a gay couple who lives in Norfolk, Allen said the state's prohibition on same-sex marriage could not be justified even under the most lax constitutional test for state actions: whether it had a "rational" connection to a legitimate state purpose. Her ruling will not immediately make marriage licenses available to same-sex couples in Virginia because she ordered that her decision be stayed pending an expected appeal.
"The Court is compelled to conclude that Virginia's Marriage Laws unconstitutionally deny Virginia's gay and lesbian citizens the fundamental freedom to choose to marry. Government interests in perpetuating traditions, shielding state matters from federal interference, and favoring one model of parenting over others must yield to this country's cherished protections that ensure the exercise of the private choices of the individual citizen regarding love and family," the judge wrote.
Guess who appointed Judge Allen?
The case, if it can be appealed must be appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The problem is that appellate courts have to rule based on the record from the trial court. The record is the transcript of witnesses’ testimony and other evidence the trial judge heard.
With Virginia’s Attorney General refusing to defend the case, the case might not even be appealed and even if it is, the record may be very limited.
Once again, we see an imperious federal judiciary overruling the voters of a state to advance a social experiment that changes America from the nation that we know into something totally unrecognizable.
And with the striking down of this law, can the liberal state apparatus be far behind? That liberal state apparatus is the one that will force you to support homosexual marriage whether or not it conflicts with your religious beliefs.
next we will be forced to pay for sex change operations.
No worries: you can get one! As well as your maternity coverage, Thomas.
Since in her ruling made the wrong assertion--can the citizens of VA file to have this overturned because of her blatant lack of knowledge? Not being a lawyer, don't understand if this faux pas is pertinent--thanks :)
Note that that this faux pas was in the first paragraph of the OPINION AND ORDER. It appears at the top of page 2 of 41 of the .pdf document. If one cannot even get first paragraph correct, how can one possibly get the subsequent "logic" correct?
Thanks for the links--will be sending them to my HS aged niece who lives in VA--this is definitely IMO a "teachable" moment.
Your exactly right Vern, but then, again isn't that what most of the Obama administration does, (miss quotes) and so many people just take that as correct? How many times have we heard the Second Amendment miss quoted, or interpreted? It's not long and very easy to read and understand. (only 27 words)
" A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Most people will skip over the comma separating (free state and the people). As both being separate entities.
The Democrats seem to know nothing, so in the absence of their knowledge that could support their statements they have to make up stuff.
I don't really support people living together without a marriage certificate but it doesn't seem to matter to anyone anymore.
Why no hue and cry about that one?
Strain at a gnat and swallow a camel....another Biblical edict.
The people of Virgina should just ignore the ruling by the judge. Obama has set the precedent when he refused to enforce the marriage protection law. And again when his attorney general refused to prosecute the black panthers in the voter intimidation case. And many many other times he refused to follow the law so why should any of us care what a judge or anyone else rules.
If we conservatives keep the infighting going through 2014 we will lose it all. remember 4 million stayed home because Mitt Romney was to liberal for the pure and he was Mormon and the evangelicals could not vote for him.
So it appear that the right thinks it is punishment for the RINO Republicans - will Obama the Socialist Progressive Redistributionist won by default and he will continue to appoint these kind of Judges during this year - Harry will approve them.
This leaves one sure way to end the usurping DC government and Obama Executive usurping.
Your title for this discussion starts with "Shocker"--really--disturbing, disgusting abuse of power might be more apropos--shocker--no when you consider who the judge is.