Quantcast

Comments about ‘Federal judge strikes down Texas gay marriage ban but leaves it in place pending appeal’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Feb. 26 2014 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

It is a dark day in the history of the Republic. The definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman and the right of the people to develop public policy that advances the goals they want government programs to advance have again been attacked. The voters have decided to make marriage focused on raising children, and thus create a form of marriage that allows this. The judges continue to ignore the actual intent of the voters.

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

This is a very uneven article, in that it gives voice to activists for the end of man/woman marriage, but does not give voice to the many defenders of man/woman marriage. The refusal to give full voice to activists on both sides of the issue is just one of many ways that the media consistently taints the coverage of this important public policy issue.

J. S.
Houston, TX

This is great news for Texans, but almost predictable, even in TX, one of most conservative states.

Since last June's SCOTUS ruling of Windsor, there hasn't been any judge to rule in favor of SSM opponents. Those opponents need to ask themselves why all these judges, whether appointed by Democrat or Republican presidents, all reach the same conclusion.

As similar court rulings piles up, all in one same direction, it will be more and more unlikely that marriage equality can be stopped

Utah state government would rather choose to spend big bucks and hire outside lawyers to appeal, well, good luck with that.

Charlana L.
Payson, UT

I love the freedom found in this nation. We the people are the government. I am puzzled and feel a need for change when the Judges who are appointed by those who we have elected are systematically and blatantly overriding the laws of the states, six so far. This is misuse of power, disregard for people's will, and disregard of state's rights.

Kalindra
Salt Lake City, Utah

@ JPLoM: Sorry, but the Constitution does not allow citizens to vote away the rights of other citizens. No one has ever been able to provide a legally justifiable reason to prohibit same-sex marriage, including claiming it is for the children since same-sex couples have children.

The article prints the only arguments that those opposing same-sex marriage have made - it is not the fault of the article's authors that there is a dearth of data that can be offered in support of a ban.

The anti-same-sex marriage arguments have been hashed and rehashed and don't stand up to legal scrutiny of even the most lax variety.

my_two_cents_worth
university place, WA

@John Pack Lambert of Michigan

You said: "The voters have decided to make marriage focused on raising children"

Yet the same voters have yet to ban opposite sex marriage to couples who cannot or choose not to have children. Why is that? Could it be because the "children" argument is invalid?

Baccus0902
Leesburg, VA

Good for Texas!!! Congratulations!!!!

@ John Pack Lambert of Michigan

" This is a very uneven article, in that it gives voice to activists for the end of man/woman marriage, but does not give voice to the many defenders of man/woman marriage"

John,
Please tell me/us, who is promoting to end man/woman marriage?

Nobody is attacking traditional marriage
Nobody is against man/woman marriage
Nobody will deprive a child of his/her parents
If you are a man and want to marry a woman. Please, go ahead.
If you are man and want to marry another man. Please go ahead.
If you are a woman and want to marry a man. Please go ahead.
If you are a woman and want to marry another woman. Please go ahead.

We are not fighting to curtail your or anybody else's rights. We are fighting to enjoy the same rights you enjoy. No more no less. Is it really that hard to understand?

You are wrong or you are lying to spread fear. I rather believe you are wrong.

A Guy With A Brain
Enid, OK

California. Utah. Oklahoma. Now Texas.

Here we go again.

The people know what is wise. Many of our judges are fools.

God bless America and all those who still love her as God intended her to be.

FT
salt lake city, UT

Judges have sworn to uphold the constitution. He's just doing his job. Quite well too I might add.

Steve C. Warren
WEST VALLEY CITY, UT

@FT Amen.

This latest ruling by a federal judge in support of same-sex marriage tends to confirm my LDS belief that the Constitution was indeed established "by the hands of wise men" raised up by God. (Doctrine & Covenants 101:80)

Karen R.
Houston, TX

Way to go, Texas!

BTW, a new poll shows that a majority of Americans now support SSM. It also shows that increasing numbers of the religious support SSM across ALL religions. I am very happy to see this. Reason, justice, and compassion are prevailing.

Utefan60
Salt Lake City, UT

Charlana L.
The freedom you so easily speak of was won by the adherence to laws that guarantee rights to all citizens, be they black, white, gay, straight, man or woman. None of these judges is taking away anyone's freedom. They are in fact restoring the constitutional freedoms guaranteed. These are not "activist judges" ignoring the will of the people. They are judges with education and understanding that people can't just vote away other's rights. If this country is to be run only by the voice of the people, then slavery and the abolition of Mormonism would have happened. We live in a Republic where the rule of law prevails.

equal protection
Cedar, UT

@John Pack re: "The voters have decided to make marriage focused on raising children, and thus create a form of marriage that allows this."

The solution to ignorance is reason, not more ignorance.

"The issue before this Court is whether Texas' current definition of marriage is permissible under the United States Constitution. After careful consideration, and applying the law as it must, this Court holds that Texas' prohibition on same-sex marriage conflicts with the United States Constitution's guarantees of equal protection and due process. Texas' current marriage laws deny homosexual couples the right to marry, and in doing so, demean their dignity for no legitimate reason. Accordingly, the Court finds these laws are unconstitutional and hereby grants a preliminary injunction enjoining Defendants from enforcing Texas' ban on same-sex marriage."

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments