Florida Counties End Courthouse Ceremonies to Avoid Performing Same-Sex ‘Weddings’

Florida Counties pdWhile agreeing to issue “marriage” licenses to same-sex couples as per a federal court ruling, several counties throughout Florida have decided to no longer allow weddings to be held at their courthouses in order to avoid being required to officiate homosexual ceremonies.

According to reports, officials in Duval, Clay and Baker counties have concluded that they must discontinue utilizing the county courthouse for weddings altogether to protect the rights of conscience for their clerks.

“I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman,” Duvall County Clerk of Courts Ronnie Fussell, a Southern Baptist, told the Associated Press. “Personally it would go against my beliefs to perform a ceremony that is other than that.”

Baker County Clerk Stacie Harvey stated that the room that had been used for weddings will now be used for domestic violence injunctions.

“I needed the space, and our county, we’re in the Bible Belt,” she said. “If we’re made by the law to issue a gay marriage license [we will] do that, but we are not mandated to marry couples in our courthouse.”

As previously reported, in August of last year, U.S District Judge Robert Hinkle declared Florida’s marriage amendment, which enshrined marriage as being solely between a man and woman, as unconstitutional.

“Inasmuch as marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized,” the amendment reads.

  • Connect with Christian News

Hinkle compared uniting those of the same gender with marriages between men and women of different racial backgrounds, and said that society must tolerate that with which they disagree.

“Those who enter opposite-sex marriages are harmed not at all when others, including these plaintiffs, are given the liberty to choose their own life partners and are shown the respect that comes with formal marriage,” he opined. “Tolerating views with which one disagrees is a hallmark of civilized society.”

Attorney General Pam Bondi filed several appeals about the matter, including asking the U.S. Supreme Court to issue a stay on the ruling, which permitted licenses to be issued beginning on Jan. 6. The state also awaited a ruling from Hinkle as to whether his decision applied statewide or only to a specific county.

On Thursday, Hinkle ordered all county clerks within the state to issue same-sex “marriage” licenses–a directive that clerks in Duvall, Clay and Baker, as well as others, state that they will comply with. However, since county courthouses are not required to be used for marital ceremonies, they will discontinue the practice altogether to avoid being compelled to officiate homosexual events.

But some would say that the clerks should resist the order to issue the licenses as well, exercising the Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrates.

As previously reported, talk show host and former pastor Mike Huckabee stated in September during a conference call with the organization Vision America that Christians need to be more active in resisting evil in the land.

“I would remind people that the judicial branch is not the supreme branch, and the Supreme Court is only the Supreme Court, not the Supreme Being,” he said. “And I feel that we have failed in civics to understand that there are three branches of government, and one can’t overrule the other two, and all three of them together can’t overrule the people.”

“Yet, we have people who say, … ‘The courts have ruled on same-sex marriage, we have to live with it,’” Huckabee continued. “I would suggest no, we don’t. We shouldn’t just accept things that are ungodly and that will cause us to have to stand before God with bloody hands. I think that’s where we’ve failed.”


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • Gary

    I like this move by these counties. The federal courts are completely sold out to the sodomites. It is the official policy now of the us government to promote homosexuality. That is one of the reasons the us government is under judgment from God. Anyone who works for the us government now is working against God. That will turn out badly for them.

    • robertzaccour

      Government employees are individual people like the rest of us. You can work for the government as a Christian and have a clear conscience. For example I served in the Marine Corps for 4 years.

      • Gary

        The Marine Corp, like the other branches of the military, now endorses and promotes homosexuality. Anyone who is a member of the military now is a part of that, even if they don’t think they are. And because God is judging the us military, it is now more dangerous than ever to be in the military. Not only is the military run by idiots, but God is against it.

        • robertzaccour

          The military doesn’t endorse homosexuality, it only permits it. There is nothing wrong in joining the military. In fact it’s a good thing to serve and something to be proud of. Being a former Marine doesn’t mean I agree with homosexuality. Walmart permits homosexuals to shop there but working for Walmart or shopping there isn’t wrong. McDonald’s permits homosexual employees and customers. I ate there yesterday and my conscience is clear.

          • Gary

            The military DOES endorse homosexuality. You obviously have not been paying attention. As a Christian, there is no way I would join the military, or allow my children to join. Neither would any of us agree to be drafted. I am not willing to put my life in the hands of someone like Obama. I am not willing to work for people who endorse homosexuality, which the US Government absolutely does. And I am not willing to work for God’s enemies.

          • Taussig

            I couldnt imagine having someone like you as my backup. How pathetic you are to throw those under the bus that would gladly give their lives for the freedoms you enjoy.

          • Gary

            Those now in the military who think they are “defending America” are delusional. The military works for the politicians, the bankers, and the arms manufacturers. If they were really defending America, they would be allowed to win the wars they are fighting.

          • pax2u

            so Gary since you are now Once Saved Always Saved you no longer sin?

          • Taussig

            you hate america don’t you? you sound like an angry little boy stamping his feet and shaking his fist at the sky

          • Gary

            I have become aware how corrupt the government is.

          • pax2u

            I see that Gary is paranoid about the Military, he hates everyone but that very small and angry fraction that believes what he believes and hates what he hates,
            he truly is part of the black helicopter, tin foil hate, lunatic fringe
            very scary

  • Neiman

    Just wait, a suit will follow and then they will be forced to perform such marriages.

    • Gary

      The lawsuit probably will be filed. But because they are also not allowing men to marry women at the courthouse, that might be their way out. But, as determined as the us government is to promote homosexuality, that might not matter. The courts might tell them they have to allow homosexual “marriages” even if they don’t allow real marriages.

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        There would be no legal basis upon which to issue such an order.

    • thoughtsfromflorida

      Doubtful. Unless the clerk is required to perform ceremonies in the courthouse by law, then there would be no basis for a lawsuit. Filing such a suit would be a waste of time.

      • Neiman

        In this day and time, with a ultra liberal and thoroughly anti-Christ judiciary, they cannot only file a lawsuit, chances are very great that they would win. They can manufacture a legal basis and the judiciary will turn a blind eye.

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          The judiciary is not “ultra liberal” nor anti-Christ.

          “they cannot only file a lawsuit”

          Anyone can file a lawsuit. Do you think people SHOULDN’T be allowed to file lawsuits?

          “chances are very great that they would win”

          Upon what basis?

          “They can manufacture a legal basis”

          A legal basis cannot be “manufactured” for why a county clerk is required to perform wedding ceremonies in the clerk’s office.

          • Neiman

            Those are wholly your secularist opinions, not fact. We have too much evidence that the courts are anti-Christ, wholly liberal and where homosexuals can win virtually any decision they want and do not need established law on their side.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “We have too much evidence that the courts are anti-Christ, wholly liberal and where homosexuals can win virtually any decision they want and do not need established law on their side.”

            What evidence would that be?

          • Neiman

            It is in the daily news, every day. But, your not being a Christian, you will never agree, you will only see your dark side of every issue.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Ahhh…so you don’t actually have any evidence to present. Got it.

            “you will only see your dark side of every issue.”

            LOL. Too funny. YOU are the one who sees the dark side of every issue. You make mountains out of molehills. YOU suggest that the entire judiciary is “wholly liberal” (would that include the 6th circuit which ruled that same-gender marriage bans can remain in place?) and anti-Christ. YOU suggest that law can be “manufactured”.

            Your reliance on hyperbole weakens your credibility.

          • Neiman

            The Truth is the Truth and you hate the Truth, very liberal and secular of you.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            I love the truth. Now, if you would only provide some.

          • Jack

            If it’s in the daily news every day, pick one example from the 365 examples from last year. Or pick one of the three since the new year began. Present your example and don’t worry what people will think.

            Why don’t you pick the decision of the federal district court in PR on same-sex marriage? How’s that for a start?

          • Neiman

            Well three cases in the last year, among thousands, immediately come to mind, two with bakers and one with a photographer where unconstitutionally the courts decided against their 1st Amendment rights of religious expression and for gays to force them to participate in the wicked wedding ceremonies. Or, recently the decision against firefighters that they had to participate in a gay pride event against their Christian conscience.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Well three cases in the last year, among thousands, ”

            Well that would mean that there are, at a minimum, 1,997 other cases. Perhaps you could cite cases that would even come close to that amount.

            “gays to force them to participate in the wicked wedding ceremonies.”

            In NONE of those cases did the business participate in a same-gender wedding ceremony. They were not “forced” to do so, nor did they. You are simply lying.

            You seem to be under the mistaken impression that any judicial ruling which results in Christianity not being placed above other religions is “anti-Christ”. You are mistaken. There is a huge difference between faith-neutral and being “anti-Christ”.

          • Neiman

            1. Your hate and arrogance are duly noted,
            2. I am unwilling to invest the time citing every case or even a great many, I have given you a sampling from the news, if that is not sufficient for you and your demands – too bad. I have no respect for you nor do I care what you believe.
            3. They refused to submit, but they were being subjected to the force of the Law to violate their faith or lose their businesses and livelihood.
            4. Just because in your raging ego you think you alone know anything, I am not mistaken that all of these myriad of cases are instances of the State’s open hostility towards the Christian faith and only the Christian faith, a hate against Christ and His Church that you are part of.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “1. Your hate and arrogance are duly noted,”

            Please point out the specific comments I have made that would indicate ‘hate and arrogance”

            “2. I am unwilling to invest the time citing every case or even a great many, I have given you a sampling from the news, if that is not sufficient for you and your demands – too bad.”

            So you have no proof of your claim – it is a lie. Got it.

            “3. They refused to submit, but they were being subjected to the force of the Law to violate their faith or lose their businesses and livelihood.”

            So they were not forced to participate in the “wicked wedding ceremonies”. That was another lie.

            “they were being subjected to the force of the Law”

            Do you believe that people should NOT be held accountable to the law?

            “to violate their faith or lose their businesses and livelihood.”

            That is another lie. They could, as some did, change what they offered as a part of their business. Some CHOSE to close their business as a sign of sticking to their faith. Some experienced such a significant drop in their business because the people in the community no longer wanted to patronize their business, that they closed their business. NONE of them are kept from earning an income nor did any of them “lose” their business.

            “I am not mistaken that all of these myriad of cases are instances of the State’s open hostility towards the Christian faith and only the Christian faith, a hate against Christ and His Church that you are part of.”

            Please cite a single case that shows open hostility towards the Christian faith and a hate against Christ.

            For a person who claims to be Christian, you certainly seem surprisingly at ease with lying. How do you reconcile that behavior with the teachings of the Christian faith?

          • Jack

            You were right. I don’t see how those are anti-Christ or wholly liberal. Since the baker cases were brought by homosexuals, you do get to count those as wins for the homosexual team. But you now have to show how these cases are anti-Christ and were wholly liberal. And you need to show how they were unconstitutional, since the constitutional defenses offered were found to be invalid.

          • Neiman

            The targets of homosexuals are almost wholly Christians and designed to force them to compromise their faith in a desire to force others to agree to their sexual lifestyle choice. It is the desire and need of the homosexual community to as much as possible silence the Christian faith and/or infiltrate their ranks to pollute the faith into agreeing to their sexually immoral lifestyle; or, they cannot rid themselves of the guilt they all feel for their perverse sexual desires and in the false belief they can get God to change His words of condemnation against them.

            The courts have with rare exception shown contempt for the First Amendment and the clause that defends their rights to religious expression anywhere, whether at work, play or in the public arena. So, they routinely abridge that right with their anti-Christ perversions of the Constitution. The courts are wrong and have no problem bending the Constitution in favor of their own atheism.

          • Jack

            I’m sorry, but I cannot, at this moment, digest your hyperbolic, overly exaggerated barrage of erroneous statements and crass overgeneralizations. You were asked for evidence that the “courts are anti-Christ, [and] wholly liberal.” Instead you merely gave examples of courts upholding a standing law and following Supreme Court precedent.

            Now you are *claiming* that Christians are targeted. This is something that must be proven, not assumed. You can’t assume true the very thing you are being asked to prove. You claim there is a design to force them to compromise their faith. I see laws being upheld. You claim this is to force the Christians to “agree to their sexual lifestyle choice.” But you have to PROVE that there is a sexual lifestyle choice and that there is an attempt to force others to agree to it — and that is simply preposterous; you can’t force someone to agree to something they don’t agree with.

            Then you claim there is an attempt to silence the Christian faith. This is another preposterous claim. Prove that is the goal. Show that it is even possible.

            Really, Infiltrate?

            Let’s look at the First Amendment for just a moment. You claim that there is a “right[] to religious expression anywhere, whether at work, play or in the public arena.” So that means that I, a Jew, can enter your church during your worship and express my religion. It means that a group of Muslims can stand outside your church and block your entrance while they pray one of their five daily prayers. It means that Muslim men can have more than one wife. It means that Santeros can sacrifice live chickens in public parks. It means that — well, it means that anyone can do anything anytime and anywhere IF they do it in the name of the free exercise of religion.

            Good luck in the United States of Anarchy.

        • Ambulance Chaser

          Since you seem to know everything about the judiciary, perhaps you’d like to tell us how such a case might be presented? And on what basis it could be won?

          • Neiman

            I do not know everything about the judiciary, I am no lawyer and while I have studied the Constitution, I am no expert.

            I can say that looking over about 50 years of Supreme Court cases, cases in the news and looking at the trends, while of course there are always exceptions, for the most part the judiciary has ruled against the Christian Church, which was wholly contrary to our judicial, history before 1962.

            So, I can only speculate and yet I can see how they can use the practices and patterns of other counties in the state and if they are mostly willing to perform gay marriages, then a few counties would denying them could represent unfair and unequal treatment. Of course, there can be other, even more imaginative causes brought to bear.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “I do not know everything about the judiciary, I am no lawyer and while I have studied the Constitution, I am no expert.”

            Then how is it you feel comfortable stating as fact that “unconstitutionally the courts decided against their 1st Amendment rights of religious expression”?

          • Neiman

            Because I have studied the Constitution over many decades and have observed and noted how court decisions have proceeded and changed over time.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            So even though you admit that you don’t know everything about the judiciary, that you are not a lawyer, and that are no constitutional expert, because you have “studied the Constitution over many decades and have observed and noted how court decisions have proceeded and changed over time” you feel that you are able to state as fact that the court ruling was unconstitutional.

            Hmmmm…..well if you ACTUALLY had studied court decisions, you would see that they have been clear that it is NOT a violation of the 1st amendment to require a business of public accommodation to adhere to anti-discrimination laws. So, apparently, you are lying about your knowledge of case law.

            So, tell me, what kind of studying have you done over decades regarding the constitution?

  • Psychdude1

    Actions produce consequences. If the federal courts want to force people to act against their consciences then a pushback should be expected. In the end, same-sex couples who want to be married will be left to seek such services from ministers who have no problem officiating such ceremonies, which is where they should have gone in the first place.

    • Gary

      Yes, there will be a pushback. When the government promotes evil and violates people’s religious rights, that will not just be quietly accepted.

      • Neiman

        First, it is the duty of any Christian, IMO, to let their voices be heard and to refuse to compromise their faith, based on God’s Word, no matter the consequences. In so doing we are testifying against this evil world.

        Yet, not wanting to be a naysayer, in my many years of bible study and the study of end times events, I find absolutely not a single passage that speaks of any nation repenting of their evil and turning back to God. Rather I read that the souls of men will wax colder and colder to God’s Word, that evil will increase and abound; and then, suddenly, when the last soul that God has foreseen has come to His salvation, destruction and judgment will come upon the whole earth.

        By all means let your voices be heard, testify against the evil we see at the hands of evil men, by all means refuse to compromise your faith; but, do not be deceived either, we can only speak against evil, while this is Satan’s hour and a great deception which is anti-Christ is taking over the world at warp speed.

  • Kathryn Evans

    So those atheists and gays better find religion soon, or else get married in a U/U church….

    • Gary

      Atheists and homosexuals probably will not convert to Christianity. Maybe to some other religion.

      • BarkingDawg

        Not while you are holding your self up as a shining example of Christian values.

        (That was snark, BTW)

        • Gary

          If I was not around, they still would reject Christ. They (atheists and sodomites) won’t submit themselves to God.

  • Miss-Ruth Heaven

    “I would remind people that the judicial branch is not the supreme branch, and the Supreme Court is only the Supreme Court, not the Supreme Being,” he said. “And I feel that we have failed in civics to understand that there are three branches of government, and one can’t overrule the other two, and all three of them together can’t overrule the people.”

    “Yet, we have people who say, … ‘The courts have ruled on same-sex marriage, we have to live with it,’” Huckabee continued. “I would suggest no, we don’t. We shouldn’t just accept things that are ungodly and that will cause us to have to stand before God with bloody hands. I think that’s where we’ve failed.”

    I agree completely. It encourages me to know that there are still some God-fearing people left in America.

    • Gary

      In this day, the courts run the federal government. I know they are not supposed to, but they do anyway. Most people have accepted the idea that if the courts make a ruling, it is the law of the land and must be obeyed. I don’t believe that is true, and I hope a lot of others don’t accept it either. But most people do accept it.

      • Miss-Ruth Heaven

        This is 100% true. I have learned this first-hand. I’m not sure how your observation pertains to my comment (not saying it doesn’t: I have a bad headache and can’t really think straight at the moment lol) but I appreciate the truth of it, nonetheless.

      • Ambulance Chaser

        What would you have people do then? Ignore Supreme Court rulings?

        • Gary

          If they are bad rulings, yes. We have to do something to combat judicial tyranny.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            OK, which Supreme Court rulings would you like people to ignore?

          • Gary

            Roe v Wade, and any that allow homosexual behavior to be legal.

      • Jack

        The courts cannot rule on an issue unless it is brought to them. Even then, they have to have jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the defendant. And there still has to be an actual case or controversy. The courts can’t rule the federal government because the overwhelming majority of decisions made throughout the legislative and executive branches never become the subject of a law suit.

        When a court makes a ruling, it is the law of the jurisdiction. New York State is divided into four federal districts. A ruling in the Western District of NY has no force or precedential standing in the Southern District, the Northern District or the Eastern District. It is expected that the ruling will be obeyed.

        Are you suggesting that we each of us decide which court rulings we will obey? Do feel the same way about statutory laws and regulatory rules? Because you would then be advocating anarchy.

      • Taussig

        you can always move to another country

  • T S

    I know, instead of trying to force your religion and religious beliefs on someone else, try keeping your religion out of your government job, or did you people forget about the separation of church and state? Try doing the job you were hired for without complaint, or quit and get a different job? Oh wait, then you wouldn’t have government paid benefits for you or your family. How convenient for you. Stop being bigoted and accept the fact that your racism and bigotry can not be hidden by your religion and stop using your religion to backup your racism and bigotry. No matter what god you pray too, one the commandments of your christian religion is “love your neighbor as you love yourself.” Actually, if God is correct, and you properly follow that which He said, then after loving God with all you have, and then loving your neighbor as yourself, those are the two greatest commandments above all others. Why don’t you people follow that which He said, or are you screwing your god over with that? Seriously, get a clue.

    • Gary

      Why does loving your neighbor include cooperating with their sinful behavior? Are Christians instructed in the Bible to help people sin?

      • Susan Miller

        We are not suppose to help people sin but we are not to judge them. That will be God’s job. I have friends that I love but doesn’t mean I also accept their lifestyle. I accept who they are and not what they are.

        • Gary

          God has already judged homosexuals. I just agree with God’s decision.

    • James Grimes

      When God condemns sinful behavior, then Christians cannot support it. Nothing that you can say will change this.

  • dark477

    I wonder if I can just stop doing part of my job because it conflicts with my “conscience”?

    • Gary

      Do you have a conscience?

      • dark477

        Not when I’m working.

        • Gary

          Then I’m glad I’m not your employer.

          • dark477

            When I’m working I do what’s required of me. That’s what any good employee should do.

          • John_33

            That’s the same line of thinking that the Nazis used (not that you are one, but it’s the same argument). If we check our consciences at the front door of where we work, then we will be open to do horrific things when ordered to do so. That’s how a Germany reserve police battalion murdered thousands of Jews across Poland.

          • dark477

            Actually my arguments is do your job provided it is in line with the law (and I mean mans law not your gods).

          • John_33

            That’s precisely what the Germany reserve police battalion did. By law, occupied Poland was under German control. They followed the orders of the ruling government.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_Police_Battalion_101

          • dark477

            Godwin’s Law invalidates any argument.

          • John_33

            But the example I presented is applicable here. Godwin’s Law doesn’t state that you can’t talk about the Nazis. Think about it, should WWII historians claim Godwin’s Law whenever someone mentions the Nazis? Of course not, because we can draw valid points from this period.

            Think about the individual officers of Police Battalion 101. What should they have done when they were ordered to round up and kill all of the Jews in Polish cities? They could have refused to participate in the slaughter and saved the lives of tens of thousands of Jews. Instead, they threw their consciences aside and did the job that they were told to do. It’s a sad but true example why we need to hold to certain principles over the whims of those in authority. We know that it’s wrong to massacre civilians. That’s just one issue of conscience that we can reliably hold to even if our employer or the ruling government tells us to do otherwise. There are many more issues like this one that we ought to take a stand on as well.

          • dark477

            Would you call someone a good employee if they just refused to do their job whenever they felt like it?

          • John_33

            No, but I’d rather have a hardworking employee who kept a clear conscience than an employee who would do anything merely because they were told to do it by someone above them. You can trust that the former will do a good job when they get a position of power, but you can’t trust the latter with anything since they have already demonstrated themselves to be unscrupulous.

          • BarkingDawg

            Godwin’s Law Rules!!!!!!!!!

          • pax2u

            I think that they abolished slavery in NC

      • pax2u

        do you Gary?

  • Victoria DiAgnello

    Praise God! I’m so glad that someone is following their words up with actions! There is so much compromise and it needs to stop. God will hold everyone accountable.
    I commend them highly!

  • Gary

    It seems most people think God either endorses homosexuality, or He just sort of ignores it. But God neither approves of homosexuality, nor ignores it. Not only is He holding accountable those who practice homosexuality, but equally so those who support them. Judgment is coming soon to a city near you.

    • BarkingDawg

      Gary, science has shown that people (like you) who are vehemently anti-gay, are really just trying to repress their own secret desires.

      • Gary

        Wow. You ran out of things to say very quickly. Sodomites usually try a few other arguments before resorting to calling their opponents closet sodomites.
        If you have to be a homosexual to oppose homosexuality, that means that over half of the population is homosexual. The homosexuals are, of course, and then their opponents are too. LOL.

  • thoughtsfromflorida

    “we’re in the Bible Belt,”

    “I needed the space [for domestic violence injunctions].

    Hilarious.

    What? They didn’t need the space before? Is she expecting a spike in domestic violence injunctions once two citizens of the same gender – in the bible belt – are allowed to enter into civil marriage?

    • BarkingDawg

      Is she saying that bibles and wife beating to go together somehow?

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        At the least, it appears that being in the bible belt does not affect the level of domestic violence, as it has increased to the point that she needs more space.

  • thoughtsfromflorida

    It certainly is within the legal rights of the Clerk to change the policy on holding ceremonies in the clerk’s office.

    I am curious, though, as a Souther Baptist, if the Clerk, prior to performing opposite gender wedding ceremonies, inquired if the couple drink alcohol, play cards, gamble, or if either of the couple had been previously divorced for reasons other than adultery. Those issues would also be in violation of her faith. Ya think she checked on those and then refused?

    If not, then this is not an issue of religious conscience. It is simply an issue of prejudice, and she is a hypocrite.

    • Gary

      She has every right to be prejudiced against homosexuals. Even if she is a hypocrite.

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        Agreed.

      • BarkingDawg

        and people have every right to point out her bigotry.

        • Gary

          And to point out yours.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Which is?

    • BarkingDawg

      I’m willing to bet that they will go back to allowing courthouse weddings (for everyone) within a year or two.

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        i would imagine so as well…..if not sooner.

      • Jack

        Much sooner.

  • BarkingDawg

    this reminds me of the cities and communities that filled their swimming pools with cement, 50 years ago, rather than integrate them.

  • Jack

    They aren’t “‘marriage’ licenses.” They are “marriage licenses.”

  • Bradley James

    I understand that Mike Huckabee quit his Fox job to check out his ability to run for POTUS.
    I surely would vote for him. If anybody could save this country, it would be him.

  • Alfina

    What difference does it make in your personal lives that gay people can get married? I think those of you who protest so loudly against homosexuality have issues regarding your own sexual orientation. There have been so many outspoken anti-gay pastors who end up in homosexual liaisons that it has become fodder for comedians who relish the irony. Just live your own lives and worry about your own souls and, if you really believe in the afterlife, you’d better be prepared to meet a whole lot of gay people because God loves everyone Christians tell us.

    • Gary

      God condemns homosexuals. There are no homosexuals in Heaven, and never will be.

  • Alfina

    Be careful what you write, Gary. I see the word Gay in your name.

  • Alfina

    Hey Gary, they’re recruiting candidates for Westboro baptist church you know the one that calls itself Christian but spews hate filled vitriol against gay people. I’ll bet they will even promote you to the highest rank in their church, maybe even elevating you to fred phelps’ status as hater in chief. You won’t even need a resume. Just show the elders your posts.

  • Alfina

    Gary,
    Where did you meet your god when he told you there are no homosexuals in heaven? At a Denny’s restaurant? I was a nun at one time, actually married to Jesus and therefore was privvy to his thoughts on gay people. He loved them all. Hey Gary he hung out with mostly men the whole time he was alive even having his last supper with all men. I am assuming the picture was a selfie. He was completely devoted to his mother and never seemed to be that interested in women. My god loves everyone even you Gary!

  • John Mark IB

    wow not gonna get into some of the nastiness here, haha, pretty rough in her at times, ok so I’ll just try to avoid the debates, and here’s my 2 cents on the issues folks at least, but definitely don’t include me in any hatefulness or some of the stuff going on, especially in regards to any so called church or organization that gives the “Real true biblical Christians Baptists” a horribly bad name, please change it to Westboro haters or something, folks these people they’re not Baptists, so that’s one issue going on in here, but to the main now and with all due respect and heartfelt compassion and love of Christ, the whole homosexual issue and marriage?? still it’s not marriage in GOD’S eyes or is He now going to violate His own word? like mankind does? same as the alcohol issue really folks?? haha hilarious, and as always the state and local judges seek to do the will of the few over and by overturning legally the votes of the public? the will of the people ?? no the will of the new morality and relativistic antichrists, but thanks be to GOD! there is hope folks don’t fret just feed them what they need to eat the healthy food the mana from GOD, and give them the seeds, let GOD deal with their unplowed fields and He alone Saves here’s hope pass it on thanks and have a blessed day and week/weekend

    http://faithsaves.net/truth-for-gay-friends/

    http://www.pillarandground.org/home/?page_id=36

    http://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com

    http://www.discoverthebible.org/

  • John Mark IB

    sorry my typo was meant to say pretty rough in here** (not her)** at times

  • Tedlick Badkey

    Yet they still issue licenses… they stop nothing.

    Just petty, nasty bigotry. It will be reversed… all good things in time.