• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Arkansas judge strikes down gay marriage ban

AGENT J

"If you ain't first, you're last"
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
80,422
Reaction score
29,075
Location
Pittsburgh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Arkansas judge strikes down gay marriage ban - The Washington Post


Arkansas judge strikes down gay marriage ban

By Associated Press, Published: May 9


LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — A judge on Friday struck down Arkansas’ ban on same-sex marriage, saying the state has “no rational reason” for preventing gay couples from marrying. Pulaski County Circuit Judge Chris Piazza ruled that the 2004 voter-approved amendment to the state constitution violates the rights of same-sex couples. He didn’t put his ruling on hold as some judges have done in other states, opening the door for same-sex couples in Arkansas to begin seeking marriage licenses, though it wasn’t clear whether that would happen before Monday. “This is an unconstitutional attempt to narrow the definition of equality,” Piazza wrote. “The exclusion of a minority for no rational reason is a dangerous precedent.”“It has been over 40 years since Mildred Loving was given the right to marry the person of her choice,” Piazza wrote, referring to that ruling. “The hatred and fears have long since vanished and she and her husband lived full lives together; so it will be for the same-sex couples. It is time to let that beacon of freedom shine brighter on all our brothers and sisters. We will be stronger for it.”

The U.S. Supreme Court last year ruled that a law forbidding the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages was unconstitutional. Since then, lower-court judges have repeatedly cited the decision when striking down some of the same-sex marriage bans that were enacted after Massachusetts started recognizing gay marriages in 2004.
Federal judges have ruled against marriage bans in Michigan, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Texas, and ordered Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee to recognize same-sex marriages from other states.In all, according to gay-rights groups, more than 70 lawsuits seeking marriage equality are pending in about 30 states. Democratic attorneys general in several states — including Virginia, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Oregon and Kentucky — have declined to defend same-sex marriage bans.




Backup Links:
Arkansas Judge Strikes Down State Ban on Gay Marriage - Bloomberg
Arkansas ban on gay marriage struck down by county judge, with no stay*-*Los Angeles Times
Arkansas judge strikes down state's ban on gay marriage
Arkansas judge rules gay marriage ban unconstitutional | MSNBC
Arkansas ban on same-sex marriage struck down by state judge - CNN.com


Another one goes down. Theres only THREE states left that dont have somethign in the works to establish equal rights.
ANOTHER judge ruled this way (unconstitutional) and referred to LOVING again, how many is that now? This keeps happening yet a handful of anti-rights people try to say they dont equate and are desperately clinging to that last false premise. Guess this is just another rouge judge of like 30+ so far. SOrry but this is a equal rights issue, this is a civil rights issue and it is like loving vs Virginia.


Changes/Updates in RED
5/10/14 Version 9.0

24 States with Equal Rights (5 pending/stay)

Massachusetts - May 17, 2004
Connecticut - November 12, 2008
Iowa - April 27, 2009
Vermont - September 1, 2009
New Hampshire - January 1, 2010
Washing D.C. - March 9, 2010
FALL OF DADT Dec 18, 2010
New York - July 24, 2011
Washington - December 6, 2012
Maine - December 29, 2012
Maryland - January 1, 2013
FALL OF DOMA - June 26, 2013
California - June 28, 2013
Delaware - July 1, 2013
Rhode Island - August 1, 2013
Minnesota - August 1, 2013
New Jersey - October 21, 2013
Illinois - (ruled on Nov 20th 2013) June 1, 2014 effective
Hawaii - December 2, 2013
New Mexico – December 19, 2013
Utah – December 20. 2013 ( Stayed and will be ruled on with OK)
Oklahoma - ( Stayed and will be ruled on with UT)
GSK v. Abbott Laboratories - January 21, 2014 (could be huge in gay rights, discrimination/heightened scrutiny)
Kentucky - February 2/14/14 (Must recognize out-of-state marriages) which will lead to their ban being defeated
Virginia - February 14/14 (Stayed)
Texas - February 26/2014 (Stayed, pending 10th Circuit Court of Appeals)
Michigan - March 21, 2014 (Stayed)
Arkansas - May 5, 2014

23 States Working Towards Equal Rights

15 States with Pending Court Cases to Establish Equal Rights
Alabama
Idaho
Indiana (ruling for ONE marriage but other law suits following)
Kansas
Georgia
Louisiana
Mississippi
Nebraska
North Carolina
Pennsylvania (June 14 Trial)
South Carolina
Tennessee (Direct US Constitution Challenge)(Prilim in and 3 couples are recognized, later broader ruling coming)
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming


5 States with Court Case(s) and Legislation to establish Equal Rights
Arizona
Florida
Missouri
Nevada
Ohio (December 2013 trial) Trial had narrow ruling that Ohio will recognize OTHER state marriages but didn’t impact bans. New cases expected.

3 States with Legislation to Establish Equal Rights
Alaska
Colorado
Oregon

thats 47 states that could have equal rights by 2016 and some much sooner!

US Court of Appeals Tracker
Map: Court Locator
1st - all states have equal rights
2nd - all states have equal rights
3rd - pending
4th - april/may court case
5th- pending
6th - pending
7th- pending
8th- two cases that the plaintiffs PLAN to take all the way up if needed but nothing pending
9th- pending (statement released "as soon as possible")

Also 3 State Attorney Generals no longer defending the constitutionality of bans, joining the case against them or reviewing their constitutionality
Nevada
Oregon
Pennsylvania

3 States that still have unequal rights and nothing pending to change it yet, that’s it 3
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota

#EqualRightsAreWinning!!!!!!!!!!!!



also please feel free to let me know of any corrections or updates that need made, equality is kicking so much ass its hard to keep up, thanks
 
I missed these.

Do you have any more info on the current or pending cases in the latter 23 states?

The funny thing is, a lot of the antis have been going with the complaint that it shouldn't be a national issue. It should be done state by state. Well, apparently that's how it IS going. I guess they have no room to complain now.
 
I missed these.

Do you have any more info on the current or pending cases in the latter 23 states?

The funny thing is, a lot of the antis have been going with the complaint that it shouldn't be a national issue. It should be done state by state. Well, apparently that's how it IS going. I guess they have no room to complain now.

Court rulings don't count, because apparently those aren't a legitimate part of the system for reasons that have never been clearly explained to me.
 
The Arkansas case only applies to a specific county. It has not been ruled on at the state level yet.

I missed these.

Do you have any more info on the current or pending cases in the latter 23 states?

The funny thing is, a lot of the antis have been going with the complaint that it shouldn't be a national issue. It should be done state by state. Well, apparently that's how it IS going. I guess they have no room to complain now.

This is not doing it state-by-state. We are talking federal courts making rulings based on their own dubious "interpretation" of the U.S. Constitution. It is being done "state-by-state" in the sense that a blatantly organized campaign to have non-recognition of gay marriage declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court is being waged state-by-state to increase the chances of it succeeding. It is no coincidence that the first states targeted are some of the most conservative states on the issue.
 
Arkansas Issues First Same-Sex Marriage License - TIME

Kristin Seaton and Jennifer Rambo received the first marriage license for a same-sex couple in Arkansas Saturday, a day after a federal judge struck down the state's constitutional amendment banning gay marriage
Arkansas issued its first same-sex marriage license Saturday morning as couples lined up outside a local courthouse one day after a judge overturned the state’s gay marriage ban.

18c677a9b696430c8d333203298d6049-0.jpg


Kristin Seaton and Jennifer Rambo of Forth Smith were the first Arkansas couple to receive a marriage license Saturday after Pulaski County judge Chris Piazza ruled the ban unconstitutional Friday. The couple has been together for four years.


and it begins in Arkansas
 
I missed these.

Do you have any more info on the current or pending cases in the latter 23 states?

The funny thing is, a lot of the antis have been going with the complaint that it shouldn't be a national issue. It should be done state by state. Well, apparently that's how it IS going. I guess they have no room to complain now.

When antifeds talk about the "state", they mean "the people", not overzealous judges. If the state votes to ban and the court overturns, that's not even close to letting the "people" decide.
 
The Arkansas case only applies to a specific county. It has not been ruled on at the state level yet.



This is not doing it state-by-state. We are talking federal courts making rulings based on their own dubious "interpretation" of the U.S. Constitution. It is being done "state-by-state" in the sense that a blatantly organized campaign to have non-recognition of gay marriage declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court is being waged state-by-state to increase the chances of it succeeding. It is no coincidence that the first states targeted are some of the most conservative states on the issue.

I suggest you go to wikipedia on "same sex marriage in the united states", and scroll down to "States that license same-sex marriage" in order to get your facts straight.
 
I missed these.

Do you have any more info on the current or pending cases in the latter 23 states?

The funny thing is, a lot of the antis have been going with the complaint that it shouldn't be a national issue. It should be done state by state. Well, apparently that's how it IS going. I guess they have no room to complain now.

What in participial are you looking for, there are some updates, some pending dates etc but i dont have it all saved. Ive been ill for a little while and im way behind.

As far as the ones clinging to this is not a national issue thats a crock and always has been. Its pure dishonesty and they know it. Its never been a defensible position but yeah your right. It sorta has been going state by state. But the other failed complaint is that its "rogue judges" you know 30+ of them in multiple states all ruling very similar, its a conspiracy lol
 
When antifeds talk about the "state", they mean "the people", not overzealous judges. If the state votes to ban and the court overturns, that's not even close to letting the "people" decide.

The "people" are so wise that sometimes they think it's okay to curtail the rights of others because it's a majority vote.
 
Court rulings don't count, because apparently those aren't a legitimate part of the system for reasons that have never been clearly explained to me.

lol exactly

its funny how fast people dont like rights being granted and protected when its not thier own rights. Its pure hypocrisy.
 
The "people" are so wise that sometimes they think it's okay to curtail the rights of others because it's a majority vote.

...and if I thought marriage was a right, I'd agree with you.

If they try to prevent gays from voting, I'll hold the signs up.
 
When antifeds talk about the "state", they mean "the people", not overzealous judges. If the state votes to ban and the court overturns, that's not even close to letting the "people" decide.

individual rights > peoples votes

the state made the mistake thinking this was an issue to vote on and its being fixed
 
...and if I thought marriage was a right, I'd agree with you.

If they try to prevent gays from voting, I'll hold the signs up.

You're certainly free to think that. However, the USSC has already ruled multiple times now that it's a right. In any case, it's a red herring because of equal treatment under the law.
 
...and if I thought marriage was a right, I'd agree with you.

If they try to prevent gays from voting, I'll hold the signs up.

marriage is a right, with or without your thoughts :shrugs:
its doesn't need your approval to be one
 
You're certainly free to think that. However, the USSC has already ruled multiple times now that it's a right.

100% correct
 
I suggest you go to wikipedia on "same sex marriage in the united states", and scroll down to "States that license same-sex marriage" in order to get your facts straight.

What exactly am I supposed to be seeing there?
 
When antifeds talk about the "state", they mean "the people", not overzealous judges. If the state votes to ban and the court overturns, that's not even close to letting the "people" decide.

Aren't you rather contemptuous of the "common mind" in general, yet the "people" should determine the rights of a minority here? That interview with the arkansas senator in Religulous shows all we need to know about voters there.
 
Aren't you rather contemptuous of the "common mind" in general, yet the "people" should determine the rights of a minority here? That interview with the arkansas senator in Religulous shows all we need to know about voters there.

Actually yeah. Democracy is a joke of a system, but it's (kinda) what we have now. When in Rome...
 
Actually yeah. Democracy is a joke of a system, but it's (kinda) what we have now. When in Rome...

Well you're also basically saying the constitution (equal protection) is to be ignored whenever the "people" feel like it. What if the majority in arkansas voted to ban gun ownership or free speech?
 
Well you're also basically saying the constitution (equal protection) is to be ignored whenever the "people" feel like it. What if the majority in arkansas voted to ban gun ownership or free speech?

If you can show me the word "marriage" anywhere at all in the Constitution, I'll concede every last point you just made.
 
If you can show me the word "marriage" anywhere at all in the Constitution, I'll concede every last point you just made.

"equal protection" is meant to encompass various rights, including marriage (and lawrence v texas and DOMA case cited 14th as well)

That's like saying we have no right to cross state borders or spend our money freely or go for a walk cause it doesn't say so explicitly in the constitution. There goes thousands of rights we take for granted then
 
lol exactly

its funny how fast people dont like rights being granted and protected when its not thier own rights. Its pure hypocrisy.

You mean like the homosexual community that wants equal "rights" to receive the benefits of "marriage" but would deny equal rights to others?
 
You mean like the homosexual community that wants equal "rights" to receive the benefits of "marriage" but would deny equal rights to others?
are you saying that the whole homosexual community(just them no straights) wants equal rights and the homosexual community wants to deny "equal rights" to others?

if this is what you are saying please, PLEASE tell us this fantasy you are talking about then back it up with facts, we cant wait to read it lol
 
Last edited:
If you can show me the word "marriage" anywhere at all in the Constitution, I'll concede every last point you just made.

marriage doesn't have to be specifically in the constitution just like rape isnt in there lol
another failed strawman
 
Back
Top Bottom