Curious how the lesbian and homosexual lobbies cherry pick what constitutional provisions they want enforced. It is exactly the way of Eric Holder and Barack Obama's lawless administration. Under the MA Constitution, the courts do not have jurisdiction over marriage. Matters regarding marriage are to be left to the Governor and the legislature, says the MA Constitution. Margaret Marshal's Court ruled on marriage contrary to law. Now these charming cherry pickers want to enforce the state's "right to define" marriage. Is this another fantasy right like the right to marry? Under the Humpty Dumpty paradigm promoted by the lesbian and homosexual lobbies the court can order state agencies not to enforce laws regarding discrimination against homosexuals and lesbians. The court could order only enforcement of laws prohibiting discrimination against persons with disabilities. That is what these misguided activists say they want the court to do.
[From article]
"A federal judge in Massachusetts declared a key section of the law unconstitutional in 2010 after Attorney General Martha Coakley and the legal group Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders sued. Judge Joseph Tauro found that the law is unconstitutional because it interferes with the right of a state to define marriage"
http://bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/20120331defense_of_marriage_act_heads_to_appeals_court_in_mass/
Defense of Marriage Act heads to appeals court in Mass.
Boston Herald
By Associated Press
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment