United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Gay ‘Marriage’: A Hero in Alabama
Source:
Barb Wire
URL Source: http://barbwire.com/2016/10/04/gay-marriage-a-hero-in-alabama/
Published: Oct 4, 2016
Author: Julio Severo
Post Date: 2016-10-04 11:15:37 by HomerBohn
Keywords: None
Views: 1053
Comments: 17
Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore built his career on loyalty to the U.S. Constitution and to God’s Constitution, the Bible, and it has cost him his job — twice. At the behest of the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center, the Judicial Inquiry Commission suspended Moore Friday for upholding the U.S. Constitution against gay “marriage.” The same commission had removed him from office 13 years ago over a Ten Commandments monument. Left-wing activists wanted the monument removed from the Alabama Supreme Court. Moore defended its stay. And he was chastised and removed. Why cannot a Ten Commandments monument remain in a state court when the federal Supreme Court has an image of Moses carrying Ten Commandments engraved in its façade? This is a powerful reminder, left by past Americans, that the United States was not founded on an Islamic, Buddhist, esoteric, atheistic, humanistic or homosexualist foundation. Its foundation is the Bible and its laws, especially the Ten Commandments. Moore is a West Point graduate who loves to recite from memory long passages of the Bible and many U.S. historical documents that defend the Bible. There is no inconsistency between the Bible and the U.S. Constitution, overwhelmingly drafted by men who read and lived by the Bible. All of them did not believe in gay “marriage.” There is total inconsistency between gay “marriage” and the U.S. Constitution, because its framers had in mind the well-being of their families and nation, not the advancement of the gay ideology. Last year, on defiance of the Ten Commandments embraced by the U.S. Constitution framers, the U.S. Supreme Court imposed gay “marriage” on the United States. Moore chose not to defy the U.S. Constitution and especially the moral and spiritual foundation of its framers. He passionately embraces conservatism. He reacted when Facebook launched an app called “Let’s Celebrate Pride,” which allowed users to overlay an image of the homosexual rainbow over their profile picture. The Facebook celebration was in honor of the U.S. Supreme Court decision creating gay “marriage.” The strongest resistance came from conservative Russians, as reported by me in my article “Conservative Russians Give Moral Lesson to Facebook’s Homosexual Propaganda,” published in Barbwire. As a good conservative, Justice Moore spread my article on his Facebook profile. His message was clear: He was against the pro-sodomy judicial activism from the U.S. Supreme Court. He was supportive of the Russian resistance to this activism and to the Facebook celebration. His resistance to gay “marriage” imposed by the Supreme Court cost him his job. No one was surprised when a Christian lost his job in the Soviet Union. After all, the Soviet government was communist and officially atheistic. It was expected to persecute Christians. Yet, the U.S. Supreme Court was founded to respect officially the Ten Commandments, not the gay ideology, atheism, etc. The United States was founded to respect the Ten Commandments, not the gay ideology. Moore was removed from his job for respecting the Ten Commandments, not the gay ideology. He was removed not in the Soviet Union, but in the United States, which is theoretically the most Protestant nation in the world. How did the United States come to begin treating Christians as the Soviet Union did to them? The Soviet Union was defeated for its anti-Christian atheism. But Sodom, which promoted sodomy, including gay “marriage,” was totally destroyed. With Moore’s suspension, the message is clear: The modern U.S. has no moral and spiritual connection to its Founders and no American judge is allowed to challenge the law of the land. And this law is gay “marriage.” In a statement, Moore called his suspension “a politically motivated effort by radical homosexual and transgender groups to remove me as chief justice of the Supreme Court because of outspoken opposition to their immoral agenda.” Moore gave his Christian testimony. And the Ten Commandments in the U.S. Supreme Court façade are also a powerful testimony against gay “marriage.” At its own peril, the United States is imitating the Soviet Union and Sodom. Poster Comment: America desperately needs a legion of men like Judge Moore. He is the epitome of a fine and decent man unlike the degenerate bastard that squats atop his throne daily in the disgraced oval orifice toilet.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: HomerBohn (#0)
Ok, I'll take the bait.... So, you're suggesting that America needs 3,000 or so men like judge moore.... You can travel the nation recruiting, and when you reach 3,000.....then what? The majority of Americans believe in equality, sorry if you don't agree, but it is a fact. Society has changed. "we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie. "Listen piece of shit. Call me anti American again and your're banned. I don't like you." - aka stoned -
That right there is plenty of reason for the sodomite muzzie whore in the oval office to hate him. Elected and unelected Bureaucrats, leeches, and cockroaches are all part of the same family in the animal kingdom.
Equality has nothing to do with you faggots. Aids is your friend.
There is no equality in men marrying men, or women marrying women. On the other hand, the USSC ruled that the Federal DOMA infringed on the rights of the States to set marriage laws. Then a short two years later, the exact same Justices ruled that codifying same sex marriage was a Federal matter. Not only was the twisted logic of these two decisions enough to fry the brain of a Vulcan, but there is no law written requiring gay marriages to be performed. In short, the USSC didn't rule on a Constitutional matter, they wrote law without putting it to paper. No punishment, no citing of the statute or clarification of an existing one.. That is as un-Constitutional as it gets. Congress has the sole authority to write a law. I guess it doesn't matter, things are no different than Brown v Board of Education. The Supreme Court deviates from logic and a clear line of reasoning, to bend to the will of society. Screw the "rule of law", we 5 unelected Justices know better than the majority of voters. Exercising rights is only radical to two people, Tyrants and Slaves. Which are YOU? Our ignorance has driven us into slavery and we do not recognize it.
Plain to see from where you come from.....stay there!
Liberals are a lot like Slinkys, they're good for nothing but they bring a smile to your face as you shove them down the stairs.
Not only was the twisted logic of these two decisions enough to fry the brain of a Vulcan, but there is no law written requiring gay marriages to be performed. In short, the USSC didn't rule on a Constitutional matter, they wrote law without putting it to paper. No punishment, no citing of the statute or clarification of an existing one.. That is as un-Constitutional as it gets. Congress has the sole authority to write a law. I guess it doesn't matter, things are no different than Brown v Board of Education. The Supreme Court deviates from logic and a clear line of reasoning, to bend to the will of society. Screw the "rule of law", we 5 unelected Justices know better than the majority of voters. Indeed.
ok.... The majority of Americans believe "we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie. "Listen piece of shit. Call me anti American again and your're banned. I don't like you." - aka stoned -
You can travel the nation recruiting, and when you reach 3,000.....then what? So what's your plan? "we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie. "Listen piece of shit. Call me anti American again and your're banned. I don't like you." - aka stoned -
You are a true imbecile! You post your own comments as text you wish to quote and then comment on them. Anything you post isn't worth reading or commenting upon. Liberals are a lot like Slinkys, they're good for nothing but they bring a smile to your face as you shove them down the stairs.
Anything you post isn't worth reading or commenting upon. LOL. That guy is one dumb faggot, when he doesn't have meguro's junk stuck up his rear his got his own head stuck in it. Non auro, sed ferro, recuperando est patria
You didn't answer the question. You have no answer, do you? "we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie. "Listen piece of shit. Call me anti American again and your're banned. I don't like you." - aka stoned -
You have no answer, do you? You clueless fool. You just don't get it do you? Liberals are a lot like Slinkys, they're good for nothing but they bring a smile to your face as you shove them down the stairs.
What does the majority of peoples opinions have to do with a definition under the law? If a State wants to change the definition of marriage, they are free to do so by an act of law. The Federal Courts cannot change it just because they THINK the majority want it so. We may as well poll the populace on whether OJ killed his Nicole and her friend, and have a jury abide by that. A society is bound by a set of rules, laws and honestly unbiased Judges of that law. The Judge or Judges can't just change the laws because they think they are wrong. If they can, what is to stop a "white cracker racist" majority from ruling "separate but equal" is the way to go? OH RIGHT, nothing and they did it, leading to decades of discrimination and segregation. How about getting 5 USSC Justices to agree that the US Constitution is Un-Constitutional? Or 5 of them to allow those that practice Christianity to have their own laws, courts and Judges? Or more realistically, those that practice Islam to set up Sharia courts? Courts are there to make sure that laws are enforced equally and within the bounds of the contract the States signed, called the US Constitution. It doesn't gift power to the States, it draws its power from the States. The States have within their power regulations on marriage. If you don't like the marriage regs in Alabama, move to Washington. Marry the boy of your choice, but don't expect the sane people of the South to recognize it except for the abomination that it is. THAT is freedom. Exercising rights is only radical to two people, Tyrants and Slaves. Which are YOU? Our ignorance has driven us into slavery and we do not recognize it.
Obergefell v. Hodges, is a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held in a 5–4 decision that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. So the SCOTUS decision was not based on what the majority desires. However, because our culture has certainly changed with regard to tolerance and acceptance of same-sex marriage, it is unlikely that there will be a groundswell of support for the likes of (used to be) Judge Moore. In simplest terms - We all might as well get comfortable with same-sex marriage, it's probably here to stay. "we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie. "Listen piece of shit. Call me anti American again and your're banned. I don't like you." - aka stoned -
You skip directly past the same USSC decision in the Defense of Marriage Act. They ruled that it was un-Constitutional for the Federal Government to regulate marriage and the definition of marriage. Two years later, the exact same court ruled that it was un-Constitutional for States to regulate marriage and the definition of. The Court contradicted what they hold most high, precedent. There still is not definition of marriage by the government or the punishment or rule on who can be denied the made up "right" to marry.
Exercising rights is only radical to two people, Tyrants and Slaves. Which are YOU? Our ignorance has driven us into slavery and we do not recognize it.
Time to rename it. United States Supreme Culture Court (USSCC)
No, the USSC ruled that Federal DOMA was "unconstitutional as a deprivation of the liberty of the person protected by the Fifth Amendment." It was a case contesting the duty of the surviving same-sex spouse to pay an inheritance tax. New York recognized the marriage which took place in Ontario, Canada. The surviving spouse sought a refund of the tax. What has been explained to this point should more than suffice to establish that the principal purpose and the necessary effect of this law are to demean those persons who are in a lawful same-sex marriage. This requires the Court to hold, as it now does, that DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the liberty of the person protected by the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. The Executive chose to not defend the constitutionality of DOMA § 3 and the AG so notified the Speaker of the House. The Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG) of the House of Representatives defended the constitutionality of DOMA § 3 as an intervenor.
America desperately needs a legion of men like Judge Moore.
#2. To: HomerBohn (#0)
Moore is a West Point graduate who loves to recite from memory long passages of the Bible and many U.S. historical documents that defend the Bible.
#3. To: Jameson (#1)
#4. To: Jameson (#1)
(Edited)
#5. To: Jameson (#1)
#6. To: jeremiad (#4)
On the other hand, the USSC ruled that the Federal DOMA infringed on the rights of the States to set marriage laws. Then a short two years later, the exact same Justices ruled that codifying same sex marriage was a Federal matter.
#7. To: jeremiad (#4)
in equality it is none of their business what consenting adults do - especially with regard to entering into a contract......., sorry if you don't agree, but it is a fact. Society has changed.
#8. To: HomerBohn (#5)
So, you're suggesting that America needs 3,000 or so men like judge moore....
#9. To: Jameson (#8)
#10. To: HomerBohn (#9)
You are a true imbecile! You post your own comments as text you wish to quote and then comment on them.
#11. To: HomerBohn (#9)
You post your own comments as text
#12. To: Jameson (#11)
You didn't answer the question.
#13. To: Jameson (#7)
#14. To: jeremiad (#13)
(Edited)
The Federal Courts cannot change it just because they THINK the majority want it so.
#15. To: Jameson (#14)
#16. To: Jameson (#14)
#17. To: jeremiad, Jameson (#4)
On the other hand, the USSC ruled that the Federal DOMA infringed on the rights of the States to set marriage laws.
The power the Constitution grants it also restrains. And though Congress has great authority to design laws to fit its own conception of sound national policy, it cannot deny the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]