United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Lesbian couple get divorce after politically charged battle (editors note they weren't actually married as there is no such thing as homo pervert marriage)
Source:
MSN
URL Source: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/le ... AZg8O?li=BBnbfcL&OCID=AVRES007
Published: May 11, 2017
Author: Sheila Burke
Post Date: 2017-05-11 08:12:59 by HomerBohn
Keywords: None
Views: 8622
Comments: 37
( In this June 24, 2016 photo, Erica Witt, left, cries as she is denied same-sex parenting rights during a Knox County Circuit Court hearing in Knoxville, Tenn. Judge Greg McMillan opined that because she is a woman who legally…
NASHVILLE, Tenn. — A judge has granted a divorce decree to a lesbian couple after a custody battle that was targeted by dozens of conservative Tennessee lawmakers who tried to intervene in the case.
Loading...
The same-sex divorce and custody case became a political flashpoint after a Knoxville judge initially ruled that one of the women had no parental rights to a child conceived by artificial insemination because she did not meet the legal definition of "husband."
The judge changed his mind, granted the divorce and approved a plan for Sabrina and Erica Witt to split custody. The attorneys for the two women did not respond to calls seeking comment Wednesday.
Their divorce came May 2 as the state Legislature was pushing through a bill that gay rights groups say encourages judges to deny rights to same-sex couples when defining words such as "husband" and "wife" or "father" and "mother."
The case of the two women whose marriage fell apart became not just a private family matter but one where state officials repeatedly butted in.
Dozens of Tennessee lawmakers filed court papers to intervene in the case. They were represented by the head of Family Action Council of Tennessee, which supports one-man, one woman marriage. The lawmakers argued that they had to protect their ability to set domestic policy.
However, Knox County Circuit Court Judge Greg McMillan repeatedly refused to let them intervene. The Tennessee attorney general's office also got involved in the divorce case, arguing that Tennessee law should not be interpreted in a way that runs afoul of the U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage.
One of the state's largest LGBT rights organizations says the legislators should have minded their own business and not interfered in one of the most important and personal decisions a couple can make.
"What's next?" Chris Sanders, executive director of the Tennessee Equality Project, asked. "Are they going to pick and choose other marriages and other divorces to get involved in? It's really startling."
But David Fowler, president of Family Action Council, said in an email that the judge was right the first time when he initially decided against one of the women and ruled that the Supreme Court decision on gay marriage couldn't be broadened in the Tennessee case.
The lawmakers are appealing the judge's decision denying them intervention in the case.
Fowler has said publicly that his organization is challenging the assumption that the Supreme Court ruling legalizing gay marriage changed state laws. It supported a newly enacted statute that tells Tennessee judges to use the "natural and ordinary meaning" of words that are otherwise undefined in state law. Those words include "husband" and "wife."
The new law tries to circumvent the protections that the U.S. Supreme court gave to same-sex couples, Sanders said.
Four married lesbian couples expecting children through artificial insemination filed a lawsuit Monday over concerns that the new law could strip them of their parental rights.
Poster Comment:
Two things decided to "make a child" to create a foundation for the pseudo "family" and "marriage". The child shares DNA with only one of them. There is no father in the picture for obvious reasons. The "Mothers" are angry, irrational violent man-hating feminists and lesbians. What could possibly go wrong?(1 image)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 21.
#5. To: HomerBohn (#0)
The kid needs to be taken away and put with normal people. The dykes should spend 25 years in prison for impersonating parents.
Nice theory. Especially when you consider what laughingly passes for "normal people" these days. You need to ask yourself this,"If "normal" people were available to adopt that child and wanted to adopt that child,why didn't they?". You don't need to answer this question,but I am curious if you think a child is better off in a orphanage than as an adopted child of a homosexuals couple that want a child?
Children should not be raised by sex perverts. That is what homosexuals are. If they try to raise kids they should be taken out back and shot. An orphanage would be preferable to any any every homo raising kids.
Be the first loon in your church to take a public stand,and announce right here and now that heterosexual couples that practice oral and/or anal sex should not be allowed to marry or have children. BTW,what would be your plan for homosexual women who are already pregnant when you become the new Maximum Leader of Nazimerika,forced abortions?
Well, sodomy is sodomy. The old morality laws from 50 years ago forbade hetero couples from sodomy the same as homo couples until 1962. Then states started reducing penalties for the sodomy laws or legalizing it for married or unmarried hetero couples. These laws were rarely enforced after WW II for hetero couples unless there was prostitution involved. Wiki has a nice chart detailing the state of sodomy laws in the various states for hetero and homo couples. In 2003, Lawrence v. Texas struck down all the remaining sodomy laws, paving the way for legalizing sodomy marriage. Four Harris County sheriff's deputies responded within minutes and Eubanks pointed them to the apartment. They entered the unlocked apartment toward 11 p.m. with their weapons drawn. In accordance with police procedures, the first to arrive, Joseph Quinn, took the lead both in approaching the scene and later in determining what charges to bring. He later reported seeing Lawrence and Garner having anal sex in the bedroom. A second officer reported seeing them engaged in oral sex, and two others did not report seeing the pair having sex. Lawrence repeatedly challenged the police for entering his home. Quinn had discretionary authority to charge them for a variety of offenses and to determine whether to arrest them. When Quinn considered charging them with having sex in violation of state law, he had to get an Assistant District Attorney to check the statutes to be certain they covered sexual activity inside a residence. He was told that Texas' anti-sodomy statute, the "Homosexual Conduct" law, made it a Class C misdemeanor if someone "engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex".[17] The statute, Chapter 21, Sec. 21.06 of the Texas Penal Code, had been adopted in 1973 when the state revised its criminal code to end its proscription on heterosexual anal and oral intercourse.[18] Quinn decided to arrest Lawrence and Garner and charge them with having "deviate sex". In the separate arrest reports he filed for each, he wrote that he had seen the arrestee "engaged in deviate sexual conduct namely, anal sex, with another man".[19] Lawrence and Garner were held in jail overnight. At a hearing the next day, they pleaded not guilty to a charge of "homosexual conduct". They were released toward midnight.[20] Eubanks pleaded no contest to charges of filing a false police report. He was sentenced to 30 days in jail but released early.[21]
#22. To: Tooconservative (#21)
Well,that does sound fairer since it treats all citizens alike,but it's still un-Constitutional because it is not any of the governments business what two or more consenting adults do in the privacy of their homes or behind locked doors.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#8. To: A K A Stone (#5)
The kid needs to be taken away and put with normal people.
#16. To: sneakypete (#8)
#19. To: A K A Stone (#16)
Children should not be raised by sex perverts. That is what homosexuals are.
#21. To: sneakypete, A K A Stone, nolu chan (#19)
Be the first loon in your church to take a public stand,and announce right here and now that heterosexual couples that practice oral and/or anal sex should not be allowed to marry or have children.
On September 17, 1998, John Geddes Lawrence Jr.,[10][11] a gay 55-year-old medical technologist, was hosting two gay acquaintances, Tyron Garner,[12] age 31, and Robert Eubanks,[13] 40, at his apartment in northeast Harris County, Texas,[14] east of the Houston city limits.[15] Lawrence and Eubanks had been friends for more than 20 years. Garner and Eubanks had a tempestuous on-again off-again romantic relationship since 1990. Lacking transportation home, the couple were preparing to spend the night. Eubanks, who had been drinking heavily, left to purchase a soda from a nearby vending machine. Apparently outraged that Lawrence had been flirting with Garner, he called police and reported "a black male going crazy with a gun" at Lawrence's apartment.[16] 
Tyron Garner & John Lawrence
Replies to Comment # 21. Well, sodomy is sodomy. The old morality laws from 50 years ago forbade hetero couples from sodomy the same as homo couples until 1962. Then states started reducing penalties for the sodomy laws or legalizing it for married or unmarried hetero couples. These laws were rarely enforced after WW II for hetero couples unless there was prostitution involved.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 21.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]