• 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!

Same-Sex Marriage Ban Struck Down For Miami Area

TeleKat

TeleKat

Banned
Joined
Mar 12, 2014
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
3,775
Location
Ask the NSA
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
A Florida judge on Friday overturned the state's ban on same-sex marriage in a ruling that applies to Miami-Dade County, agreeing with a judge in another county who made a similar ruling last week. Still, no marriage licenses will be issued for gay couples in either county any time soon to allow for appeals.

The ruling by Circuit Judge Sarah Zabel mirrors the decision made earlier by Monroe County Circuit Judge Luis Garcia. Both found the constitutional amendment approved by Florida voters in 2008 discriminates against gay people. They said it violates their right to equal protection under the law guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment.

"Preventing couples from marrying solely on the basis of their sexual orientation serves no governmental interest," Zabel wrote. "It serves only to hurt, to discriminate, to deprive same-sex couples and their families of equal dignity, to label and treat them as second-class citizens, and to deem them unworthy of participation in one of the fundamental institutions of our society."

The effect of Garcia's ruling was put on hold when Republican Attorney General Pam Bondi filed notice of appeal. Zabel also stayed the effect of her ruling indefinitely to allow time for appeals, which could take months, and Bondi promptly followed up Friday by filing an appeal notice in the Miami-Dade case. The county of 2.6 million people is in the top 10 in population in the U.S.

Both judges were appointed by former Republican Gov. Jeb Bush and have been re-elected.

The legal battleground will next shift to the Miami-based 3rd District Court of Appeal for both cases, and most likely after that to the state Supreme Court. Nevertheless, Friday's ruling was cause for celebration for gay couples across the Miami area.

"It means so much for a court to recognize our family and say that we must be treated equally," said Catherina Pareto, one of the plaintiffs in the case. "We love this state and want nothing more than to be treated as equal citizens who contribute to the community and help make Florida an even better place for everyone who lives here."

Same-sex ban supporters argue that the referendum vote should be respected and that Florida has sole authority to define marriage in the state. The Florida amendment defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

Gay marriage proponents have won more than 20 legal decisions around the country since the U.S. Supreme Court last year struck down a key part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. Those rulings remain in various stages of appeal. Many legal experts say the U.S. Supreme Court may ultimately have to decide the question for all states.

Bondi said in a statement about the Monroe County case that "with many similar cases pending throughout the entire country, finality on this constitutional issue must come from the U.S. Supreme Court."

Nineteen states and the District of Columbia allow gay people to marry.

Republican Gov. Rick Scott has said he supports the amendment but opposes discrimination. His top Democratic challenger, former Gov. Charlie Crist, supports efforts to overturn it.

Florida has long been a gay rights battleground. In the 1970s, singer and orange juice spokeswoman Anita Bryant successfully campaigned to overturn a Dade County ordinance banning discrimination against gays. The county commission reinstated those protections two decades later.
Click to expand...

Same-Sex Marriage Ban Struck Down for Miami Area - ABC News
 
Bam bam bam. babam bam bam ba bam.

Anotherone bites the Dust!
 
That's, what, 32 activist judges in a row?
 
Remember that time when a court upheld a same sex marriage ban? Yeah, I don't either.
 
Redress said:
There where two 2-1 decisions on appeals, so close but not quite.
Click to expand...
Well, 32 decisions in a row, or something. At what point do people admit that this isn't judicial activism? every court is biased? Really?
 
When will people realize that if sane consenting adults want to marry...it is no one else's business.

National same sex marriage is inevitable...it's time the dinosaurs that are against it find something else to think about...like whether to try using the 'internets' or to try out 'celler phones'...or to take down their 'I like Ike' posters.

i-like-ike-button-peace.jpg
 
Last edited:
The German said:
Bam bam bam. babam bam bam ba bam.

Anotherone bites the Dust!
Click to expand...

I'd absolutely take these rulings against these bans - you know why? because they're setting nothing but precedent to strike down every tyrannical ban progressives want.

There will be no more banning of anything anymore...

In 5-years I will be back in the bar smoking my cigarettes and blowing the smoke in progressives faces..

We can play the discrimination game all damn day long...
 
Mr.Nick said:
I'd absolutely take these rulings against these bans - you know why? because they're setting nothing but precedent to strike down every tyrannical ban progressives want.

There will be no more banning of anything anymore...

In 5-years I will be back in the bar smoking my cigarettes and blowing the smoke in progressives faces..

We can play the discrimination game all damn day long...
Click to expand...

Is... Is that how you think equal protection works? "Strike down any ban?"
 
Mr.Nick said:
I'd absolutely take these rulings against these bans - you know why? because they're setting nothing but precedent to strike down every tyrannical ban progressives want.

There will be no more banning of anything anymore...

In 5-years I will be back in the bar smoking my cigarettes and blowing the smoke in progressives faces..

We can play the discrimination game all damn day long...
Click to expand...

Why are you always so angry?

Always ranting at everyone and desperatly trying to annoy everyone through attacking them.

Next time you post such an angry rant against me, I will simply report you.

Then you can go and rant at the wind.
 
The German said:
Why are you always so angry?

Always ranting at everyone and desperatly trying to annoy everyone through attacking them.

Next time you post such an angry rant against me, I will simply report you.

Then you can go and rant at the wind.
Click to expand...

Do you have something to say about the topic or just other posters?
 
Deuce said:
Is... Is that how you think equal protection works? "Strike down any ban?"
Click to expand...

Any ban that discriminates against an individual is unconstitutional...

It's really that simple...

I can use your logic against your ****ed up tyrannical bans...
 
Mr.Nick said:
Any ban that discriminates against an individual is unconstitutional...

It's really that simple...

I can use your logic against your ****ed up tyrannical bans...
Click to expand...

That is not how EPC works. Judging by the same standard does not require the same outcome.
 
Ockham said:
Do you have something to say about the topic or just other posters?
Click to expand...

You could ask the same about the poster I adressed my reply to.

And why the hell should I justify what I post to you?!

I made my point very clear.

I love the fact that this ban came down and hope to see more of those same sex marriege bans getting struck down.

And to see the closet gay extreme right struggle with the disgust they have for their own urges to suck some dick.
 
Last edited:
The German said:
Why are you always so angry?

Always ranting at everyone and desperatly trying to annoy everyone through attacking them.

Next time you post such an angry rant against me, I will simply report you.

Then you can go and rant at the wind.
Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about?

You take my intelligence as anger? because I see the loophole here?

Maybe we should stop banning stuff? NOT pandering to certain special interest groups but stop banning **** period!

This is supposed to be a free country, yet everything I personally enjoy is getting banned while progressives are pandering to trendy nonsense - and trendy nonsense includes banning things I like..

If I wanted to in 2-years I could be a lawyer if I passed the Bar - and all this pick and choose discrimination is tempting me to do just that so I can either a) punish the government via litigation or b) stand for REAL social justice.

I understand the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, however I now understand "when in Rome."
 
Mr.Nick said:
What the hell are you talking about?

You take my intelligence as anger?
Click to expand...

Oh yeah. No arrogance there.

because I see the loophole here?
Click to expand...

Which loophole?

Maybe we should stop banning stuff?
Click to expand...

What did I ban?

NOT pandering to certain special interest groups but stop banning **** period!
Click to expand...

What did I ban?

This is supposed to be a free country, yet everything I personally enjoy is getting banned while progressives are pandering to trendy nonsense - and trendy nonsense includes banning things I like..
Click to expand...

What did I ban?

If I wanted to in 2-years I could be a lawyer if I passed the Bar - and all this pick and choose discrimination is tempting me to do just that so I can either a) punish the government via litigation or b) stand for REAL social justice.
Click to expand...

Did I ban that?

I understand the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, however I now understand "when in Rome."
Click to expand...

what?
 
Redress said:
That is not how EPC works. Judging by the same standard does not require the same outcome.
Click to expand...

Oh it most certainly does - it's called precedent. You can't have your cake and eat it.
 
The German said:
Oh yeah. No arrogance there.



Which loophole?



What did I ban?



What did I ban?



What did I ban?



Did I ban that?



what?
Click to expand...

Seriously? are you that redundant?

You didn't have to pick apart the post and then say the same damn thing over and over.

I never said you banned a damn thing - nor did I even address your comment until you addressed mine. So since you did acknowledge my comment and commented on it I suppose you're opposed to my idea(s)...

I'm merely saying this country is not free with bans, weather its marriage, smoking or guns...

Now since bans have been overturned - that sets precedent for other bans to be overturned if the emphasis of said bans are discriminatory...
 
Mr.Nick said:
You take my intelligence as anger?
Click to expand...
Oh it was intelligence that made you object to a ban being struck down while being against bans?

If I wanted to in 2-years I could be a lawyer if I passed the Bar
Click to expand...
Right, BIG if and of course you could take over the world with Pinky on your side.
 
The German said:
You could ask the same about the poster I adressed my reply to.

And why the hell should I justify what I post to you?!
Click to expand...
Obviously because your post was inappropriate.

The German said:
I made my point very clear.

I love the fact that this ban came down and hope to see more of those same sex marriege bans getting struck down.
Click to expand...
Swell.

The German said:
And to see the closet gay extreme right struggle with the disgust they have for their own urges to suck some dick.
Click to expand...

So you have no problem levying slurs against heterosexuals if they don't agree with your POV. What an original opinion.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Any ban that discriminates against an individual is unconstitutional...

It's really that simple...

I can use your logic against your ****ed up tyrannical bans...
Click to expand...

That isn't my logic at all, and that's not how equal protection works. Anyone who thinks the equal protection clause bars any form of discrimination ever is ignorant.
 
Deuce said:
That isn't my logic at all, and that's not how equal protection works. Anyone who thinks the equal protection clause bars any form of discrimination ever is ignorant.
Click to expand...

That is exactly how "equal protection" works, unless you don't understand what the word "equal" means..... I wouldn't be shocked if you didn't....

Ha, well I know progressive understand the word equal when it comes to stealing from people via government and their dreams of socialism and 3-mile lines for free bread. However they lose touch with the concept when those they HATE are being discriminated against.

I suppose the concept of "group think" is more appealing to the progressive than actual equality.......

Who cares tho - I'm just some "white man" that doesn't understand....
 
Mr.Nick said:
That is exactly how "equal protection" works, unless you don't understand what the word "equal" means..... I wouldn't be shocked if you didn't....

Ha, well I know progressive understand the word equal when it comes to stealing from people via government and their dreams of socialism and 3-mile lines for free bread. However they lose touch with the concept when those they HATE are being discriminated against.

I suppose the concept of "group think" is more appealing to the progressive than actual equality.......

Who cares tho - I'm just some "white man" that doesn't understand....
Click to expand...

Sorry, no. The equal protection clause doesn't prevent every type of discrimination. The government, for example, has a maximum age for hiring military personnel or air traffic controllers. These forms of age discrimination would withstand an equal protection challenge.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Any ban that discriminates against an individual is unconstitutional...

It's really that simple...

I can use your logic against your ****ed up tyrannical bans...
Click to expand...

It is absolutely not that simple, nor do you seem to even understand the legal definitions of discrimination against individuals. Prohibiting skydiving doesn't discriminate against skydivers. Prohibiting human sacrifice doesn't discriminate against cultists from R'lyeh.

For further reading, I recommend you start with a textbook on constitutional law, or at least this: Levels of Scrutiny Under the Equal Protection Clause. After that, at least try to get through the wikipedia pages on the three levels of scrutiny. Surely this will aid you in your endeavor to get through law school in only two years, rather than three.
 
Deuce said:
Sorry, no. The equal protection clause doesn't prevent every type of discrimination. The government, for example, has a maximum age for hiring military personnel or air traffic controllers. These forms of age discrimination would withstand an equal protection challenge.
Click to expand...

That is not discrimination against adults.... Yeah you have to be 18 to smoke too and 21 to drink....

Those are called STANDARDS, however smoking is LEGAL hence you cannot discriminate against an individual partaking in a LEGAL activity - THAT is discrimination.

The government banning smoking in certain places is DISCRIMINATION...

I know it's too complicated for you to understand.

You like every progressive want's your opinion to be law or factual hence everyone else is wrong and the law only works for you not against you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom