Alabama Probate Judges Refuse to Officiate Same-Sex ‘Weddings,’ Issue Licenses

Court-GavelMONTGOMERY, Ala. — As courts throughout Alabama are set to begin issuing “marriage” licenses today to homosexuals, several judges throughout the state have vowed to uphold Alabama’s Constitution and defy a ruling striking down the state’s Sanctity of Marriage Act.

As previously reported, in 2013, two lesbians in the state sued Gov. Bentley, Attorney General Luther Strange and Mobile County Probate Judge Don Davis—among others—in an attempt to overturn the law after one of the women was denied from adopting the other woman’s child. Last month, U.S. District Judge Ginny Granade declared the voter-approved state amendment unconstitutional.

“If anything, Alabama’s prohibition of same-sex marriage detracts from its goal of promoting optimal environments for children,” she wrote. “Those children currently being raised by same-sex parents in Alabama are just as worthy of protection and recognition by the state as are the children being raised by opposite-sex parents. Yet Alabama’s Sanctity laws harms the children of same-sex couples for the same reasons that the Supreme Court found that the Defense of Marriage Act harmed the children of same-sex couples.”

As an appeal was denied in the matter, Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore, also known as the Ten Commandments Judge, sent a letter and memorandum to probate judges throughout the state, advising them that they are not required to issue “marriage” licenses to same-sex couples despite Grenade’s ruling.

“Lower federal courts are without authority to impose their own interpretation of federal constitutional law upon the state courts,” he wrote. “Not only is the Mobile federal court acting without constitutional authority, but it is doing so in a manner inconsistent with the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

Now, at least five probate judges in the state are vowing to uphold the Alabama Constitution and refuse to take part in same-sex nuptials.

“I’m not going to be a party to it,” Geneva County Probate Judge Fred Hamic told the Associated Press. “I was raised in a Christian home, and I was taught that it is a sin.”

  • Connect with Christian News

“[T]he undersigned probate judge will continue to abide by his oath of office as supported by his constituents and guided by the Alabama Supreme Court, and will only issue marriage licenses and solemnize ceremonies consistent with Alabama law and the U.S. Constitution; namely, between one man and one woman only, so help me God,” wrote Washington County Probate Judge Nick Williams in a statement on Friday.

Clarke County Probate Judge Valerie Davis has promised the same.

“I do not think I am required to compromise my religious beliefs to be probate judge,” she wrote in a statement. “Alabama law does not mandate me to issue marriage licenses to anyone of any gender.”

Chilton County Judge Bobby Martin told reporters that while he will issue licenses, he will not officiate ceremonies.

“I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, and because of that, I will not perform a ceremony for a couple that doesn’t fit in that criteria,” he said.

Elmore County Probate Judge John Enslen said that he will likewise issue licenses, but is removing himself entirely from the wedding business.

“I’m not required to do that,” he told the Montgomery Advertiser. “Some judges will choose to continue performing marriages and they can continue to do that.”

In an opinion piece written last month, Enslen stated that homosexual behavior is “repugnant and repulsive to God.”

“In other words, I believe Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for just such unnatural conduct between the same sexes,” he wrote.

AL.com reported on Saturday that it is possible that judges who refuse to comply with Grenade’s ruling may face sanctions.

“If the court issues an order and they refuse to comply with the order, then the court can find them in contempt of court, which could result in a fine or incarceration until they purge themselves of the contempt,” former U.S. District Court Judge U.W. Clemon told the outlet, but added, “I don’t think that’s likely to happen.”

But on Sunday, Moore issued an order prohibiting probate judges in the state from issuing or recognizing same-sex “marriage” licenses.

“Effective immediately, no probate judge of the State of Alabama nor any agent or employee of any Alabama probate judge shall issue or recognize a marriage license that is inconsistent with Article 1, Section 36.03, of the Alabama Constitution or § 30-1-19, Ala. Code 1975,” he wrote.

Matt Staver of the Christian legal organization Liberty Counsel said that Moore is correct in his assessment as Grenade’s decision only applies to the two lesbians who were parties to the suit, and not the entire state.

“Outside that, that order is not binding,” he said. “I think this judge by pretending to require everyone to issue same sex marriage licenses on Monday is far outside her jurisdiction and authority.”


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 support those judges who refuse to comply with the unconstitutional rulings of the federal courts. There is no Constitutional right to ssm.

    • Badkey

      I support those who will be issuing marriage licenses to gay couples today!

      It’s a wonderful thing! Life just KEEPS getting better and better!!!

      • Gary

        What you call better and better is really worse and worse. You love wickedness.

        • Badkey

          Well yeah… I do love you after all.

  • Badkey

    If you can’t do your job for all the taxpayers that support your salary, you should be fired.

    • Gary

      Lots of federal judges should be fired then.

      • Badkey

        So… who, exactly, do those judges refuse to serve?

        (this’ll be cute)

        • Gary

          They are violating their oaths by lying about the Constitution. They are not serving the people when they do that.

          • Badkey

            I knew it’d be cute.

            Do you have anything other than your opinion to back that up?

          • Gary

            Their rulings for ssm, and the US Constitution.

          • Badkey

            Your opinion found in the rulings (you only have the 6th circuit on your side) and the US Constitution, or anything (precedent, etc…) to back it up?

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            What lies have the told about the constitution?

          • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

            I live in (or is it “on?”) South Beach. I must have missed the riots, the popular uprising, vox poluli opposing equal marriage. About the only thing people fear from gay marriage is that their friends will register someplace too pricey.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            They all decided to go to the White Party instead.

          • Gary

            That ssm is required by the Constitution.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            But they have said no such thing. They have said that laws which restrict two citizens of the same gender are unconstitutional.

            If a state were to decide to stop issuing marriage licenses of any kind, they would not be required to issue licenses to two people of the same gender, therefore negating your statement that the judiciary is saying that marriage between two citizens of the same gender is “required”. If that were true, the state would not be allowed to stop issuing marriage licenses all together – which they are allowed to do.

          • Gary

            But laws that restrict two citizens of the same gender in marriage are NOT unconstitutional. No judge can prove those laws are unconstitutional because the Constitution won’t support that conclusion.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Apparently you are mistaken. However, if you feel your legal rationale is so strong, you should volunteer your constitutional expertise to the legal team that will be arguing this case before the SCOTUS. No doubt they would be most appreciative of your legal insights and clarity. It is certainly something they have been lacking.

            Let me know how that goes.

  • Fundisi

    More states need to defy the Federal Government and the Courts and stand on God’s Word against immorality. It is a lie that children from falsely called gay marriages do not get all the same protections, services and care.

    • Badkey

      And more states will lose federal money. Do you really think that’s going to happen?

      • Fundisi

        W have to stop that too, this idea the federal government can take money from the states and send it back with strings attached and by extortion forcing the states to submit to federal authority.

        • Badkey

          I actually agree with you.

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          “forcing the states to submit to federal authority.”

          The states ratified the rules. If they don’t like them, they are free to secede.

      • pax2u

        what would Alabama be with out federal money, answer, mississippi

        • Gary

          I see your claim to oppose ssm was just another of your lies.

          • pax2u

            I can support the Traditional marriage of one man and one woman, and at the same time not want to have the government execute homosexuals and some Catholics as you want

            do you also want the Government to execute Baptists that do not observe the Saturday Sabbath of the Old Testament?

          • Gary

            You are supporting ssm. It is obvious.l

          • pax2u

            I support all Children of God, against your hatred and your desire to execute Homosexuals, some Catholics and Me

            I will pray to my Christian God, Jesus Christ for your eternal soul. amen

          • Harry Oh!

            You’re confused. Christians help gays and offer them a way out of their lifestyle, it’s the Muslims that throw them off of buildings. Get a grip.

          • pax2u

            Gary has said that the Government should execute homosexuals,

            pax2u Gary • 11 hours ago
            Gary, you have said that you want the Government to execute homosexuals and some Catholics, have you added any others to your liquidation list?
            Gary pax2u • 7 hours ago
            You are one of the catholics.
            pax2u Gary • 6 minutes ago
            well Gary, so now you want me to be executed,

          • Gary

            But homosexuals never want out of what they do.

          • Gary

            Homosexuals are children of God? Where is that in the Bible?

          • pax2u

            tell us who you do not consider to be Children of God?

            do you have an execution list for that also?

          • Gary

            First, you prove from the Bible that homosexuals are the children of God. Can you do that? If you can’t, then you will be a liar, won’t you?

          • pax2u

            do you want the Government to execute Baptists that do not observe the Old Testament Sabbath?

          • Gary

            If you could prove it, you would. You’re a liar.

          • pax2u

            Disqusdmnj Gary • 3 days ago

            Well, then, since normal Americans don’t believe homosexuality is a capital offense these days, who’s supposed to administer this capital punishment if not you?

            Gary Disqusdmnj • 3 days ago

            The government would do it, if it reverenced God. Since it does not, then the people who run the government will have to answer to God for what they have done, and failed to do.

          • pax2u

            don’t you want the Laws of the Old Testament carried out Gary, or only some, which ones?

            Can a Baptist not hold the old Testament of Saturday Sabbath keeping and eat North Carolina pork BBQ

            but you would want the Government to execute Homosexuals, some Catholics and Me,?

            are you not holding to all of the Old Testament Laws, crazy gary

          • Badkey

            The bible is not needed… it’s not relevant to US civil law.

          • pax2u

            1 John 3:1 – Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.

          • Gary

            Again, the verse refers to believers, not to homosexuals. Or their supporters.

          • pax2u

            sad that you do not believe in the Christian Bible,

            do you want the Government to execute Baptists that do not observe the Saturday Sabbath of the Old Testament?

          • pax2u

            Galatiains 3

            26For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.

          • Gary

            Well, you need to read that verse very carefully. It is talking about people who have faith in Christ. But since no homosexual does, it does not apply to them. No such thing as a Christian queer.

          • pax2u

            you do not believe in the Christian Bible,

            the Muslims execute homosexuals, Gary, is that what you want the Government to do also

          • Eric InATX

            Bwahahahaaha. No True Scotsman. Google it

          • James Grimes

            I see pax2u is continuing his three-ring circus act. We have to feel sorry for him. In spite of his disgusting intentions, we know that his intellectual ability is very limited.

          • Gary

            Yeah, he is a few pears short of a bushel. But he is dedicated.

          • Spoob

            I see you continue to attack others indirectly, which is embarrassing and cowardly of you.

          • The Last Trump

            Spoob to Pax2u TODAY:

            “Trumpy and his rope, eh? And his hood, and white sheet?”

            Will your hypocrisy never end? As always, your conduct here is shameful and misleading. “Christian”.

          • Spoob

            Figure it out Trumpy. You are oppressing people. I am not.

          • James Grimes

            Look at my post below. Spoob is a disaster waiting to happen. He spews hatred, vile, and venom. He is a disgusting Atheist through and through.

          • James Grimes

            Spoob James Grimes • 5 hours ago
            “I see you continue to attack others indirectly, which is embarrassing and cowardly of you.”
            Spoob says “Do as I say. Don’t you dare do as I do”
            Here are Spoob’s Comments About Christians Directed to Other Atheists. I have called him out before as a compulsive liar, a Christian hater, and a supporter of homosexuality.

            Spoob pax2u 3 days ago
            Grimy re-edited his post above in the hopes that none of his “fans” would see it and respond to him. Have a look.
            Spoob pax2u 4 days ago
            And what does it say about Grimes that the first mention of his “dear Christian brothers and sisters” is for all his fellow bigots and haters?
            Spoob pax2u 4 days ago
            And now he says the Crusades were not the fault of the Christians, but the Catholics.
            Spoob pax2u 4 days ago
            I can’t begin to explain. He’s so bafflingly stupid. So is Gary, who’s gone all anti-Catholic in the Obama thread.
            Spoob Magister_militum_praesentalis 4 days ago
            He is pretty free with the insults, that’s for sure…
            Spoob Terry Roll 4 days ago
            He is easily the angriest person on this forum. Gary’s
            the craziest but Grimes is the angriest. Neither lives a particularly good example of why anyone would ever WANT to be a Christian. No love, no hope, no forgiveness. All bile.
            Spoob Tyler 4 days ago
            Tyler, now that Grimes has officially said “good-bye” to you, implying you won’t hear from him again, be sure to keep and eye open because he’s going to continue to diss you to other people.
            Spoob Terry Roll 4 days ago
            He and Oboehner spend nights of passion together as they dream of the deaths of homosexuals and Catholics.
            Spoob OldArkie 5 days ago
            Gary also wants to kill homosexuals and Catholics. Still want to agree with him?
            Spoob dark477 5 days ago
            I can answer that. Because Grimes is impervious to facts. He’s a sad, cold, lonely and angry little man.
            Spoob Badkey 5 days ago
            He can’t even rely on mythology, but who needs that when your hate is as strong as Gary’s?
            Spoob 5 days ago
            Not the first time he’s said something bafflingly stupid. He has also said that the
            First Amendment only protects Christians.
            Spoob Ken 5 days ago
            What we were just discussing applies to this guy, Last Trump – you will not get anywhere. You’ll get lots of self-satisfied sarcasm and name calling, though.
            Spoob Oshtur 6 days ago
            Welcome to the Wonderful World of Trumpy. Always in there like a dirty shirt when the subject is the mean bad wicked satanic homosexuals. He loves to play to the crowd, I am seeing all the usual hallmarks – the sarcasm, the “too funnys”, the “hee hees”, the self-aggrandizing. He hopes to be mistaken for someone witty someday.
            Spoob MC 7 days ago
            And then there are people like Trump who claim that God talks to them. We’re not talking about paragons of stability here.
            Spoob MC 7 days ago
            Gary has stated it quite openly, that homosexuals should be put to death. Administration here seems to take no issue with it.
            Spoob davidreilly7 7 days ago
            Pay no attention to Grimes. He hates everything but likes to pretend he’s a Christian.
            Spoob MC 7 days ago
            You haven’t been paying very close attention then if you think this place is full of ideal Chrsitians. You have Gary who would like to execute all gay people “in the name of God”, Oboehner whose choice names for homosexuals include “fur trader” and “turd burglar”, you have fun people like Trumpy and Fundisi who rail against “perversion” in every single breath over the fairly mundane subject of homosexuality – these are not
            Christians in my experience. And if they are, then you need to understand that there are certain factions of Christianity which are utterly, utterly evil.
            Spoob pax2u 8 days ago
            Gary’s merely nuts. Trump is dangerous.
            Spoob pax2u 8 days ago
            I’m starting to think Gary, Grimes, Trump, etc. are trolls. No one could possibly be this hateful.
            Spoob R.A. 9 days ago
            BRAVO! I hope psychotic pseudo-Christians like “The Last Trump” read your words and take them to heart!

          • Spoob

            Yup. How does your own medicine taste?

          • James Grimes

            Yup, very cowardly of you. That’s OK though. It is the least I could have expected from a compulsive liar. Bye.

          • Spoob

            Oh, yeah, BYE, you expect me to believe that? I know your games. You wouldn’t have anything to worry about if you could just be a normal respectful Christian and not this hate machine.

          • James Grimes

            Spoob is two-faced. He will do to you what he complains is being done to him. He and his despicable cohort, Pax2u, are the two biggest hate – mongers stalking this site. They deserve no credibility.

          • Spoob

            Meanwhile you attack homosexuals, Catholics and atheists. And pax and I are hatemongers?

          • pax2u

            notice that they do not condemn Gary who wants the Government to execute homosexuals, to them that is acceptable,

            but to expose them is their idea of hatred

          • pax2u

            funny how jimmy grimmy calls others cowardly as he then complains to himself, that is cowardly

          • pax2u

            I am sure that you will be supported by your fellow fascists

          • Beartx

            Again with the judgment thing. Very Christian. Not.

      • pax2u

        7) Alabama
        > Amt. per capita net of income taxes: $10,656
        > Population: 4,779,736
        > Pct. of U.S. population: 1.55%
        > Amt. per capita: $11,820
        > Pct. of U.S. funds per person: 1.75%

    • thoughtsfromflorida

      “It is a lie that children from falsely called gay marriages do not get all the same protections, services and care.”

      No, it is true. Your statement, however, is a lie.

    • http://www.FascistDykeMotors.com/ Katy

      Just like them old-time Southern governors who laid across the school steps to keep the black kids from going in.

      Same states. Same accents. Same attitude: “Stop them other people from doing what I have been doing all along!

      • Fundisi

        There is no comparison from denying civil rights based on skin color and discrimination based on willful, deviant sexually immoral conduct.

        • Badkey

          The comparison in mindsets is IDENTICAL.

          This, taken from the home page of the Klan and slightly modified, sounds just like you.

          “There is a [moral] war against [christians]. But our people – my [christian] brothers and sisters – will stay committed to a non-violent resolution. That resolution must consist of solidarity in [christian] communities around the world. The hatred for our children and their future is growing and is being fueled every single day. Stay firm in your convictions. Keep loving your heritage and keep witnessing to others that there is a better way than a war torn, violent, wicked, socialist, new world order. That way is the Christian way – law and order – love of family – love of nation. These are the principles of western Christian civilization. There is a war to destroy these things. Pray that our people see the error of their ways and regain a sense of loyalty. Repent America! Be faithful my fellow believers. ”

          National Director of The Knights, Pastor Thomas Robb

          Sounds EXACTLY like you and your ilk. The mentality is the same.

          • Fundisi

            While I reject racism in every form and the KKK, please tell me what in his words were wrong, where did he call for violence or hatred?

          • Badkey

            I have never accused you of calling for violence or hatred.

            I said your mentality is as the KKK’s is towards race… I stand by that. It is.

          • Fundisi

            So now you are calling me a racist?

          • Badkey

            Did I say that?

        • http://www.FascistDykeMotors.com/ Katy

          I am very happy with my prior comment, but thank you for your response.

          • Fundisi

            You know what they say about ignorance being bless, and it seems to apply to you in this case. BY the way did you know almost all of those people fighting against Civil Rights for people of color were Democrats?

          • Badkey

            Dixiecrats?

            Change in parties since the 50’s?

            Have you studied any modern US history?

            Or are you saying that your like-minded kin in the KKK voted for Barry?

          • Fundisi

            It is a lie that I have anything in common with the KKK, I wish you would say that to my 6’4″, 285 lbs black, linebacker grandson face to face just once.

          • Badkey

            You share their mentality of wishing harm on those unlike yourself. Your mentality is just like theirs, your target for discrimination is the only thing that is different.

          • Gary

            There are very good reasons to discriminate against perverts.

          • Fundisi

            You cannot prove I wish harm on anyone. I discriminate against child molesters, murderers, thieves and gross sexual immorality, but you have no objections to of them.

          • Badkey

            Preventing gay citizens from receiving the benefits, protections, and immunities of marriage harms them, as has been laid out before 60+ judges who agree that it is harmful.

            Comparing gay people to thieves and child molesters demonstrates you ware the mark. That’s sad.

          • Fundisi

            They have no right to the same privileges of married people, because they choose to live a deviant sexual lifestyle, they made their choice and should have to suffer the consequences.

            A sinner, a social deviant is a sinner and a social deviant, no matter how you choose to describe them.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “They have no right to the same privileges of married people, ”

            They are citizens. As such, they have the right.

            “A sinner, a social deviant is a sinner and a social deviant, no matter how you choose to describe them.”

            While you are certainly free to view homosexuals in any way you care to, your views are not a determining factor in the rights of citizens.

          • Fundisi

            What determines it is the moral values of a people and your side has succeeded greatly in wholly degrading and debasing the moral fiber of this country, dragging into hell with you; and while you are winning many battles, before God you will lose that war and to the everlasting harm of everyone in this nation.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “What determines it is the moral values of a people”

            In the US, what determines rights is the constitution.

            “wholly degrading and debasing the moral fiber of this country”

            The country doesn’t have moral fiber – people have moral fiber. I have no ability to affect what individuals view as moral. Therefore, I have no ability to degrade or debase the morals of others.

            “before God you will lose that war”

            I disagree.

            “to the everlasting harm of everyone in this nation.”

            How is “everyone in this nation” being harmed by allowing two citizens of the same gender to enter into civil marriage? Has everyone in Canada been harmed? The Netherlands? Spain? France? England? And if you believe they have, in what way has “everyone” been harmed?

          • Fundisi

            You liberals absolutely hate the idea that what determines rights is “the people,” as in “of, by and for the people.” The Constitution is no better or worse than its people.

            Again, “the people” are the country and they establish the moral fiber, the core values of any nation and they have a right and a duty to establish those minimum values and insist by law that the people as a whole adhere to them or suffer for their moral anarchy.

            As you have established here, you have absolutely no relationship with Christ or devotion to God and His Word, so you are the last person to have any idea of what will happen when you face the judge of all flesh and as this country has officially declared Him persona non grata in the affairs of this nation, people like you have opened the door to sexual depravity and officially sanctioned all sorts of immoral behavior contrary to His Word. He is a God of Justice and this country and you personally will answer to Him. He is now judging America and has taken His hand of protection from us and that will lead to our complete destruction.

            Yes everyone in those countries have been harmed morally and spiritually, they have given way to moral dissipation and the complete destruction of the family.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “You liberals absolutely hate the idea that what determines rights is “the people,” as in “of, by and for the people.””

            I don’t know who “you liberals” is, but I certainly don’t hate that idea. I think it’s great. What “the people” set up was a constitutional republic where citizens rights were not subject to the whims of the majority.

            It seems that you don’t like that form of government. You would prefer a form of government where, by a simple vote of the majority, the rights of others can be restricted, without any recourse. It’s a shame that you don’t like our constitution and the protections it provides. Perhaps you would be happier living somewhere else.

            “Yes everyone in those countries have been harmed morally and spiritually, they have given way to moral dissipation and the complete destruction of the family.”

            So it is nothing more than your opinion that they have been harmed because something is now legally allowed that is contrary to your religious beliefs. Wow. Quite the hubris to suggest that because you have chosen to believe in something, that everyone who doesn’t believe it is harmed.

            In none of those places as the family been completely destroyed. Your reliance on hyperbole distracts from what very limited creditability your arguments might have.

          • Eric InATX

            Considering I’m Jewish, your view of Jesus is very different than mine. Which is exactly why the government should not get involved in religion. Because the real truth is that Jesus isn’t the son of god, and you are living a lie. Reject your false prophet and follow the real god.
            But keep the government out of it.

          • Gary

            Homoes are not prevented from receive the benefits of marriage. They are free to marry by the same rules as everyone else.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Laws which ban two citizens of the same gender from entering into the legal contract of marriage, harm those individuals. You support those laws. Therefore, you support harming those citizens.

          • Fundisi

            Homosexuals have a right to marry, they are not denied that right; they just should not be allowed to turn history on its head and create a new definitin of marriage which includes people of the same gender. If they want to engage in civil contracts to establish a legal union sharing things in common, there is nothing stopping them. But, with only a couple of very rare and short term exceptions, marriage has historically been only between a man and a woman and that was for the betterment of society and to try and change that into something else is to change marriage into something it never has been, is not now and never will be and is to pervert and harm society.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Homosexuals have a right to marry, they are not denied that right”

            Inherent in the right to marry is the right to marry the consenting adult of one’s choosing. To suggest that because homosexuals have the right to marry a person they do NOT want to be married to, that they have the same rights as those who are allowed to marry the person they DO want to, is specious.

            “they just should not be allowed to turn history on its head and create a new definitin of marriage which includes people of the same gender.”

            Why? Because you don’t like it?

            “If they want to engage in civil contracts to establish a legal union sharing things in common, there is nothing stopping them.”

            There is no civil contract that provides the same rights, benefits, and protections as civil marriage.

            “and is to pervert and harm society.”

            How is society perverted and harmed? Because something is allowed that you don’t like or agree with?

          • Eric InATX

            Rare and short term? Have you read the old testament? Polygamy was (and still is in many parts of this world) practiced throughout biblical times

          • Fundisi

            I am so sorry that you are so grossly ignorant. The operative words were “between a man and a woman,” and even though polygamy was never approved by God, these states of polygamous marriage were not between people of the same gender.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            The KKK wishes to base our laws on biblical teachings. You want to base our laws on biblical teachings. So, yes, you do have at least that in common.

          • Fundisi

            What you are trying to do is place a hood over my head, me placing a burning crosses on lawns, hanging anyone I think is not a Christian, or not white, and terrorizing people. If you deny it, you are lying.

            As our ancestors, from the Pilgrims, I believe Christians are citizens and have a right to try and influence our laws to reflect our Christian moral/spiritual values that we might live in peace and enjoy liberty. To accuse me of wanting a Christian theocracy is a most damnable lie.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “What you are trying to do is place a hood over my head, me placing a burning crosses on lawns, hanging anyone I think is not a Christian, or not white, and terrorizing people.”

            I am doing no such thing. Your statement is an outright lie. All I did was point out that, contrary do your statement, you in fact DO have something in common with the KKK.

            Or are you saying that our laws should NOT be based upon Christian beliefs, and thus you do not share that belief with the KKK?

            “I believe Christians are citizens and have a right to try and influence our laws to reflect our Christian moral/spiritual values”

            I agree.

            “that we might live in peace and enjoy liberty.”

            If we are restricted in our rights based upon the beliefs of a single religion, we are not enjoying liberty. Just the opposite. We are experiencing repression of liberty.

            “To accuse me of wanting a Christian theocracy is a most damnable lie.”

            So you DON’T want our laws to be determined solely upon the Christian belief system?

          • http://www.FascistDykeMotors.com/ Katy

            Haha… I’ve never heard the phrase “Ignorance is bless” and seriously question whether it is really a thing.

          • http://www.FascistDykeMotors.com/ Katy

            You should be careful about looking stupid when you’re trying to call other people stupid.

            I’m not interested in your brand of “Let’s spend all day throwing around insults.” Sorry.

            if you ever want to learn about the topic you’re talking about, though, I’d be happy to try and help.

          • Fundisi

            A typographical error does not make one stupid, it means they typed too fast and failed to adequately proofread.

          • http://www.FascistDykeMotors.com/ Katy

            My offer to teach you the basics of then topics you’re trying to talk about stands.

            Have a great week!

          • Edith

            Well, Ms. Katy, I’m standing with Jesus Christ? Can you do any better than Jesus for anyone. I don’t think so!!!! Laws and theology huh yea, I,m waiting to read your basics. The basics that are happening now is a war between right and wrong. There are no middle grounds at all.

          • http://www.FascistDykeMotors.com/ Katy

            Why do you believe my comment was directed at you, exactly?

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          Nor is any such comparison being made.

    • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

      It is a lie that children from falsely called gay marriages do not get all the same protections, services and care.

      Really? Suppose dad has a defined benefit pension plan and dies? Suppose the couple splits up? Suppose there is a problem in school and the “non-designated” parent is the only one available?

      • Fundisi

        So children are denied these benefits when their biological father dies or even a step-father dies and has designated them as their beneficiary? In almost all school districts the biological parent or lawful custodian can name anyone as being able to be called in when such things occur.

  • Badkey

    THIS JUST IN: In a 7 – 2 vote, SCOTUS refuses to extend the stay against gay marriage in Alabama! Woo hoo!

    • Fundisi

      We live under judicial tyranny, this too must be stopped. The gaystopo must be stopped.

      • Badkey

        How are you affected?

        How is the marriage of any opposite gender couple affected?

        And lastly… how will it “be stopped”?

        • Fundisi

          It will not be stopped, I have said that from the beginning. But if 99.9999% of all the people agree, it will remain a sin that fact notwithstanding and an offense against God and He will have the final say and He will allow the nation to completely destroy itself, we do not deserve His protections any longer.

          • Badkey

            Ah, back to groveling before sky monsters to get your way.

            Sad.

          • Fundisi

            What is sad is that if you are wrong, the price for your arrogance is everlasting suffering in hell. I pretty high price to pay for your out of control ego.

          • Badkey

            Spoooooky mythology is spooooooky…

          • Gary

            I am not sad about that. They pervert sin to righteousness, so they will get what they want. And they will deserve it.

          • Fundisi

            In my Christian beliefs, we are to love every human being, even the most vile enemies of Christ, He did, He suffered and died to pay for their sins as well – even for those that crucified Him; then considering hell is everlasting, conscious suffering, in utter darkness, all alone; it should in my beliefs cause us great sorrow that anyone would reject the Love of God and choose by their rebellion to suffer such unending torment. While surely that is the fate of all unrepentant sinners, I find no joy that anyone would thus suffer, knowing it may be family, friends, co-workers as well.

      • Thomas Aquinas

        We’ll stop if you let us lick your butt

  • Badkey

    And the first couples have been wed in Alabama!!!

    See how much good Moore did!?

    https://twitter.com/Fox6Clare/status/564792948400066560

    • MattFCharlestonSC

      ERMAGHERD!!! END TIMES!!!

    • Gary

      Shameful and repulsive.

      • pax2u

        do you want the Government to execute them?

        tell us Gary

        • Gary

          Do you wish you could marry your boyfriend?

          • pax2u

            sorry Gary, I am married to my female wife,

            so Gary are you going to have the government execute Baptists that do not observe the Old Testament Sabbath?

          • Gary

            The government won’t do anything I tell them to do.

          • pax2u

            do you want the government to execute homosexuals?

            do you want me to post your statement?

          • Badkey

            I did, sweetheart.

            I’m touched at your concern.

          • Gary

            You pervert. Queer.

          • Badkey

            Awww… so sweet!

            Why does my being married bother you?

            How does it affect you?

      • Badkey

        Why?

        • Gary

          Homosexuality and ssm are perversions. They are abominations to God and to all decent people.

          • Badkey

            Yes, we know your opinion.

            However, like noses, everybody’s got an opinion, and they all smell.

            Your god isn’t relevant to issues of civil law.

            Anything else?

          • Gary

            God will not permit you, or anyone else to tell Him what he can and cannot be involved in.

          • Badkey

            Your deity isn’t capable of stopping anything, sweetie.

            That’s why this is state # 37.

          • Eric InATX

            eating pork is an abomination to God and all decent people. You should be put to death

      • Beartx

        Yes, indeed you are.

  • TheBBP

    God put our leaders into place, we are to pray for them. Keep voting and keep praying. We know that Satan owns this round. However, we are also assured:

    Romans 14:11-12
    11For it is written, “AS I LIVE, SAYS THE LORD, EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW TO ME, AND EVERY TONGUE SHALL GIVE PRAISE TO GOD.” 12So then each one of us will give an account of himself to God.

    That will be a day of wonderous joy for those who have chosen to follow Christ, while it will be the sudden onset of a horrific eternal reality for those who have shunned and mocked Him.

  • Rich Zawadzki

    “…the Supreme Court’s departures from the Constitution are driven by “elites” against the express wishes of a majority of the public. The tendency of elite domination, moreover is to press America ever more steadily toward the cultural left…The Court…came to embrace…radical personal autonomy in moral matters. The Court majority, to put the matter plainly, has been overtaken by political correctness. Traditional values are being jettisoned and self-government steadily whittled away. The American people have no vote on these transformations; efforts by legislatures to set limits to cultural change and to control its direction are routinely, and almost casually thwarted.” Robert Bork, “A Country I Do Not Recognize” The Legal Assault On American Values, Hoover Institution Press, 2005, Pgs. 9-11

    http://www.amazon.com/Country-Do-Not-Recognize/dp/0817946012/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1417449664&sr=1-1&keywords=A+country+I+do+not+recognize

    • TheBBP

      This is how it goes. When the angry left want something changed, they get it on a ballot to be voted on. When the people still reject them, they get it worked behind closed doors and have judges legislate from the bench.

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        “have judges legislate from the bench.”

        No judge has legislated from the bench.

        • Fundisi

          Wrong! They almost exclusively legislate from the bench. If they did not, they would simply decide in each case if the law, policy or regulation in questioned either adhered to or violated the Constitution as written and amended; but not order remedies, which is the role of the Congress and Legislatures, not the courts. They have no right appealing to international laws, precedent, writings of the Founding fathers or anything but the actual words in the Constitution, or they are acting unconstitutionally.

          • Badkey

            Wow… so they’re not supposed to interpret the constitution?

            Who woulda thunk it?

          • Fundisi

            No they are NOT to interpret it, that implies they can change it, legislate it as they desire. They are only to apply its exact wording against all laws, policies and regulations to make sure the latter are in compliance to its actual words.

          • Badkey

            Please identify where thy have changed it in any way.

            I’ll wait.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “They are only to apply its exact wording against all laws, policies and regulations to make sure the latter are in compliance to its actual words.”

            Be sure to let the SCOTUS know about this. They believe otherwise. Oh, when you do so, be sure to cite the exact basis for your belief.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Okay, and if the exact wording is unclear?

          • Fundisi

            I believe the Constitution as written and amended is clear, but if the courts disagree, it is not up to them, but the people and the Congress to amend it and make it clear. It is not up to these politically biased jurists to force us to accept their word on the subject.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Wrong! They almost exclusively legislate from the bench.”

            Please cite one law that has been written by the judiciary.

            “They have no right appealing to international laws, precedent, writings of the Founding fathers or anything but the actual words in the Constitution, or they are acting unconstitutionally.”

            Please cite where in the constitution it says that members of the judiciary citing “international laws, precedent, writings of the Founding fathers or anything but the actual words in the Constitution” is unconstitutional.

          • Fundisi

            It is in the Constitution – only the Congress may legislate, the courts rule on constitutionality and the facts. When you liberals allow them to do otherwise, you make them into a super-legislative branch superior to the other two which both then must submit to the Court in all things, which destroys separate but equal branches and makes the Congress into the inferior branch.

          • Badkey

            You’re a fine example of why we need more robust civics education in schools.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            I’ll ask again:

            Please cite one law that has been written by the judiciary.

            Please cite where in the constitution it says that members of the judiciary citing “international laws, precedent, writings of the Founding fathers or anything but the actual words in the Constitution” is unconstitutional.

          • Fundisi

            How can you say we have a legal document between two parties and then say we must appeal to many things outside that document to determine what it actually means. That means the document is meaningless, no one can count on its clear words, because judges, self appointed legislators, can by making such outside appeals change it say anything they want. If words have no clear meanings, then whatever they say is meaningless.

            Try Separation of Church and State, those words appear nowhere in the Constitution, they appear only in documents outside the Constitution, but that thoroughly evil Hugo Black and the Leftist FDR Supreme Court rewrote the Bill of Rights judicially, they inserted a word and meaning that does not appear in our Constitution and their decision changed the Constitution, they legislated a Leftist, godless meaning to the First Amendment which made it meaningless and turned this nation into open warfare against the Christian Church. Or take Roe v Wade, they forced a right into the Constitution that does not exist, they legislated from the bench. In fact for roughly 60 years, nearly every decision of the Supreme Court has been wholly legislative in nature, they insert or take out words and meanings from those clearly intended by our Founding Fathers, their decisions becoming new law.

            In every case they should have affirmed or rejected certain laws and turned it back to the Congress, to the “peoples representatives” for legislative corrections, not dictate new laws from then bench. Now go away, I am not interested in your god hating, socialist interpretations.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            I’ll ask again:

            Please cite one law that has been written (the definition of legislating) by the judiciary.

            Please cite where in the constitution it says that members of the judiciary citing “international laws, precedent, writings of the Founding fathers or anything but the actual words in the Constitution” is unconstitutional.

            “they inserted a word and meaning”

            Please cite the words that were added to the Bill of Rights.

            ” their decision changed the Constitution”

            Please cite how the constitution changed after that ruling.

            “turned this nation into open warfare against the Christian Church.”

            Complete hyperbole.

            “Or take Roe v Wade, they forced a right into the Constitution”

            Please cite where in the constitution it states that abortion is a right.

            “they insert or take out words and meanings from those clearly intended by our Founding Fathers”

            Please cite any words that have taken out of, or added to, the constitution based upon SCOTUS rulings.

            “In every case they should have affirmed or rejected certain laws”

            That is what they have done.

            “turned it back to the Congress, to the “peoples representatives” for legislative corrections”

            That is what they did.

            “not dictate new laws from then bench”

            Again, please cite one law that was written by the judiciary.

          • R.A.

            Well, there’s that one law…you know…the one where…where…things.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Oh yeah, that one. I forgot about that one.

          • http://twitter.com/LWAYNECAMP LWC

            Marbury v Madison may be of interest to your quaeritur.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            I’m familiar with it and it was interesting. Thanks.

          • http://twitter.com/LWAYNECAMP LWC

            Apologies. My comment was misdirected.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            No worries.

          • James Grimes

            The one with a “husband” insulted you. I’ll bet you will lose sleep on this one.

          • SFBruce

            When all aspects of a law are declared unconstitutional, what remedy, other than non-enforcement, can fairly be entertained? The role of precedence is so firmly rooted in our sense of juris prudence, I’m surprised you question it. Stare decisis is at it’s heart a conservative principle. Without out it, we’d have chaos.

          • Fundisi

            What if the precedent was wrongly thought out and decided, the court is loathe, even when they know it to be wrong, to change it. Yet, you would say, though we have to live with it.

            The problem is that if “we the people” are supposed to live and breathe free under the Law, we must be able to trust that words have meaning and that the Founding Fathers meant what they said, but when you make appeals to many things outside those words, then you render the words meaningless and we cannot trust the Law. So, unless the Law is amended, the court must be restricted to say a law, regulation or policy either adheres to or violates the law as written, or we are that mercy of the bias of the jurist, all unelected political appointees. So with each change in the court, each law will change meaning.

          • SFBruce

            You contradict yourself: on the one hand you say with each change in the court, the meaning of laws will change, based on the bias of the relevant judge, but that’s precisely one reason why honoring precedent is so important. If state judges can pick and choose which federal court orders they will honor, law and order completely disappears.

          • Fundisi

            No I do not! They are separate matters entirely.

            Precedent is not etched in stone, it can and often is in error and to blindly adhere to precedent means those false interpretations and errors become enshrined in law and they change our Constitution.

            When I spoke of laws being changed by political appointees that go outside the Constitution, which Constitution does not include precedents by the Court, it means that they must be forced to only apply the Constitution as it is written, using only the words therein and if those words need changing, let the people amend the Constitution and deny the court the power to amend it at will.

            The States are not wholly subservient to the federal government, they have a right and a duty to oppose unjust laws forced on them by an out of control, dictatorial federal judiciary. The electorate, the people, will, using the ballot box as the constitutional corrective if they do not agree with state actions. You may not know it, but even the Congress and the Executive branches are not subservient to the Legislative Branch, they too have a responsibility to interpret and enforce the Constitution. If not, then do away with them and let us have a nation ruled by the judiciary.

          • SFBruce

            You’re making arguments against claims I haven’t made. Bad precedents should be overruled, as Dred Scott was, but it should unfold in an orderly way. State judges can not simply declare a federal court order “dictatorial.” When a state thinks a court order interferes with basic freedoms, they have the right to appeal, and if that fails, there’s the option of a constitutional amendment, both of which are unavailable in actual dictatorships.

          • Fundisi

            When the Judiciary gets out of control, as has the Supreme Court, it is the responsibility of the states to refuse to submit and stand on their values, we are after all a union of independent states. If enough states refuse to submit, we can reign in this judicial tyranny. To tamely submit is to allow it to go unchecked and that throws our three separate but equal branches of government and states rights out the window.

      • Badkey

        They didn’t reject me… they voted in favor of myself and my husband getting married.

        Ain’t that cool?

        • James Grimes

          Badkey is a woman?

          • Badkey

            Hardly, sweetcheeks.

          • James Grimes

            Yuck!

          • Badkey

            *KISSES*

          • James Grimes

            You’re grossing me out if you’re one of THOSE.

          • Badkey

            You poor little thing.

          • Gary

            It wants to get romantic with you James.

          • James Grimes

            I’m not interested in it. The thought alone turns my stomach.

          • Badkey

            Then why do you think about it so much?

          • Badkey

            Oh, Gary… I have a heart only for you, my dear!

          • Gary

            He would have to be in order to have a husband.

        • pax2u

          be prepared for Gary to add you to his list of those he wants the government to execute

      • OldArkie

        That is so true, judges these days have been allowed to much power, they are now ruling the citizens of this country, telling us what we can and can’t do when this is a government that is supposed to be ruled by the people. Of course if our politicians did as the people, citizens, stated they would not get rich in Washington.

      • Eric InATX

        Kinda like Hobby Lobby. You have no problem with Judicial Activism when you agree with them…

  • James Grimes

    The only thing coming out of this story is how depraved many people are. Those who support gay “marriage” are against what God has decreed. These are the same people who will condemn those who hold to a biblical worldview. We were warned about this, so it is not surprising. It’s still disturbing.
    BTW, I’m not interested in hearing from those of you who fall into this category. Your obnoxious opinions mean nothing to me.

    • Spoob

      That’s right, just wantonly insult all your enemies like a good Christian.

    • Eric InATX

      La-La-La-La-La-La-La-La Sticking my head in the sand… I’m a good Christian La-La-La-La-La-La-La-La

  • Harry Oh!

    Transformation away from common decency is pushed, adopted and promoted by a legal and political class completely bypassing the democracy we THOUGHT we lived in.

    • Pollos Hermanos

      We don’t live in a democracy, if you thought so you’re very mistaken. We live in a Constitutional Republic and have since day 1.

      • Gary

        But it is broken.

        • Pollos Hermanos

          Seems to be working fine from what I can tell.

          • Harry Oh!

            Whatever you THINK it started out as, it has now eroded into an oligarchy.

          • Pollos Hermanos

            History is pretty clear that we started out, and remain a Constitutional Republic. Do you have any evidence otherwise?

          • Gary

            If you are not aware of the evidence, you have not been paying attention.

          • Pollos Hermanos

            So you don’t have any then I take it.

          • Gary

            I don’t want to take the time to educate you. The information is out there if you care to see it.

          • Pollos Hermanos

            Unfortunately I left my foil hat at home.

          • Gary

            Fine. Stay ignorant.

          • Pollos Hermanos

            Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Thanks for making me smile on a Monday morning.

          • Gary

            Then you don’t understand what is happening.

        • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

          You are correct. There is a general lack of respect for the Establishment Clause. People are intent on making us a Christian nation when we are not. Our founders never intended it to be that way.

          • Gary

            You don’t know history. I, and other Christians are not asking for a theocracy. We are simply asking for laws that are moral. ssm is an immoral law.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “moral” based upon your religious beliefs. That is a theocracy.

          • Gary

            No. Having laws that are moral does not mean there is a theocracy.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            If you create laws which restrict the freedoms of citizens based solely upon religious belief, that is a Theocracy.

          • Gary

            Then you would have to favor eliminating the laws against murder, theft, rape, extortion, and pedophilia since all of those laws have their basis in religion.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Prohibitions against those things existed long before the bible came along. They are not rooted SOLELY in religious belief.

          • Gary

            God is the one who decided those things are wrong. Anyone who says it was their idea is lying.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            You are certainly free to believe that.

          • Gary

            Yes, I am. And I will.

          • Eric InATX

            Well, since the first humans are long dead, no one is saying it was their idea.

          • Eric InATX

            Ummm – NOPE! And even if they were, those laws certainly predate Christianity by many thousands of years…

          • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

            According to whom? The purpose of religion is to provide a path to the afterlife. Follow the rules and you go to paradise post mortem. Some people insist that the rules include not consuming pork or shellfish. Strangely, those people are not trying to make the consumption of pork illegal.

            Our civil morality is very different from “the rules.” That morality includes equal protection and due process.

          • Gary

            Equal protection and due process do not have to include ssm.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Why not?

          • Gary

            Because ssm is not a right. Equal protection just means the laws should apply to everyone equally, and the marriage requirements always have.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Marriage involves two consenting, non-closely related, adults. If two adults of opposite gender are allowed to marry but two adults of the same gender are not – that is not equal protection under the law.

          • Gary

            Yes, it is. Always has been. The argument could as legitimately, or illegitimately be made that to allow non-closely related adults to marry but not to allow two closely related adults to marry is not equal protection.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “be made that to allow non-closely related adults to marry but not to allow two closely related adults to marry is not equal protection.”

            Yes it could. If that challenge were made, then it would be upon the state to prove that such restrictions are necessary, something they have failed to do regarding restrictions based upon gender.

          • Gary

            They have not failed to do it based on gender. The federal judges decided how they would rule before they even considered the cases. It was fixed from the start.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            What is your basis for saying that?

          • Gary

            Nobody who reads the US Constitution will be convinced that heterosexual-only marriage is unconstitutional. The Constitution does not define marriage, and the marriage requirements have always applied to everyone equally, making them constitutional. In order for a judge to rule in favor of ssm, their motivation lies outside of the US Constitution.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Nobody who reads the US Constitution will be convinced that heterosexual-only marriage is unconstitutional.”

            That is obviously a false statement, as there are many people who have read the US Constitution and have concluded that laws denying access to civil marriage based solely upon the gender of the two citizens is a violation of the 14th amendment.

            “In order for a judge to rule in favor of ssm, their motivation lies outside of the US Constitution.”

            So you have no basis for your statement other than it is just what you want to think. Apparently you have not read any of the rulings on these cases. Their rationale is firmly based in the constitution and case law.

          • Gary

            The decisions in favor of ssm cannot have been based on the US Constitution because there is no basis written in the constitution that would lead a rational person to conclude that. ssm is not listed in the Constitution as a right, and limiting marriage to one man and one woman violates no part of the Constitution. The ONLY way an argument could be made that the marriage laws are unconstitutional is if they excluded homosexuals from marrying, BUT THEY DON”T.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “and limiting marriage to one man and one woman violates no part of the Constitution.”

            Well, Gary, the judiciary disagrees with you and, in the end, from a legal standpoint, that’s really all that matters. So if you want to continue to believe that denying two citizens of the same gender the right to marry does not violate the 14th amendment, then by all means, continue to believe that.

            Maybe you can make up some signs for the next time you travel to a gay pride parade to “protest”.

          • pax2u

            watch out Gary sometimes wants an armed revolution against the US Government, then other times he wants the US Government to execute Homosexuals, some Catholics, and he has added me to his execution list.

            poor Gary needs a civics lesson, since he does not accept the role of the Judiciary to interpretation the constitutionality of Laws passed by the legislature branch and signed by the executive branch,

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “poor Gary needs a civics lesson”

            I was thinking more along the lines of a therapist….but civics lessons works as well. Baby steps.

          • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

            Justice Kennedy and two score of other federal judges seem to disagree with you.

          • Gary

            Then they are wrong.

    • thoughtsfromflorida

      If we thought we live in a Democracy, you were mistaken to begin with. The US is a not a democracy. It is a constitutional republic.

    • Badkey

      We’re a republic… not a democracy.

      Why do you act like the vote of the people has never been trumped before?

      • Asemodeus

        Actually it is both. The concept of democracy and a republic are fluid enough to include both.

        If you want to be technical, America is a Constitutionally Limited Representative Democratic Republic.

        The Constitution limits the powers of the state. We elect politicians to represent us in democratic manner with a winner takes all system. We are a republic that sets certain rights held by the people to be inalienable and thus immune from the tyranny of the majority.

        • Badkey

          No, we are a constitutional republic.

          The constitution is the supreme law of the land, not the vote of the people (unless said vote modifies the constitution).

          • Asemodeus

            The Constitution is indeed the supreme law of the land, but that doesn’t exclude the idea of a winner takes all style of democracy. Which is allowed in this country. So yes, we are both.

          • Badkey

            For congress, yes… for interpretation of the constitution and dissemination of benefits, immunities, protections, and obligations of citizenship, no.

          • Asemodeus

            So yes, we are both a democracy and a republic. The distinction isn’t that clear cut as people make it out to be.

      • Harry Oh!

        Harry Hopkins, FDR’s right hand man, said,
        “Tax and Tax, Spend and Spend, Elect and Elect, because the people are too damn dumb to know the difference”. You’re living proof of that.

  • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

    The only thing that happened here is that Roy Moore reset his 15-minute clock. Marriage equality comes to Alabama. A week from now, none of the opponents will really care.

    • Gary

      The opponents of ssm and homosexuals will continue to care that the law and society are being perverted.

      • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

        Oh please. What has happened in Massachusetts, after eleven years of equality, to justify the ban? It still has one of the lowest divorce rates in the country. Its kids outperform the rest of the country in science and mathematics. There hasn’t been a comet strike and not one so-called “traditional marriage” has been affected in any way whatsoever.

      • Badkey

        And yet you will change nothing.

        • Gary

          We’ll see.

          • Badkey

            I already see.

            You have changed nothing… you will change nothing.

            Because gay marriage changes nothing (unless you’re weak enough to let it change your opinion of your own marriage).

          • Gary

            I will not tolerate ssm or homosexuals or their supporters.

          • Badkey

            And what affect will that have on “homosexuals or their supporters”?

          • Gary

            Wait and see.

          • Badkey

            Sure, Gary, sure… Like waiting over 2,000 years for Jesus to come again (get him a towel)?

  • thoughtsfromflorida

    “But on Sunday, Moore issued an order prohibiting probate judges in the state from issuing or recognizing same-sex “marriage” licenses.”

    That doesn’t appear to be going very well. It will be interesting to see how long the 5 probate judges continue with their refusal once they have been sued.

    “Segregation now. Segregation tomorrow. Segregation forever!”

    • Pollos Hermanos

      While it might be annoying for the couples wishing to get married, it’s entertaining watching all the foot stomping.

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        Quite the display of juvenile selfishness at no longer getting to harm people because they don’t like something.

        Oh well.

    • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

      This time around the bar association needs to revoke Moore’s ticket and put an end to his road show (“look at me” — “look at me”) once and for all.

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        They may well do so.

    • http://www.FascistDykeMotors.com/ Katy

      I like how he tried to pawn it off on the governor – saying basically that the governor would be ordering the arrests of judges who comply with the feds – and the governor said, “Huh? I’m not arresting judges!”

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        He serves in an elected position. He appears to be doing nothing more than pandering to the electorate.

    • http://www.FascistDykeMotors.com/ Katy

      I like how he tried to pawn it off on the governor – saying basically that the governor would be ordering the arrests of judges who comply with the feds – and the governor said, “Huh? I’m not arresting judges!”

  • thoughtsfromflorida

    Approximately 4 more months and this will most likely no longer be a legal issue in the US. Then maybe all these “pro-family/pro-traditional marriage” folks can put some effort into things that ACTUALLY affect traditional marriage and family – like divorce and out-of-wedlock births.

    • Gary

      THis issue will not go away if the SC rules in favor of ssm.

      • Badkey

        Again… a question you can never answer:

        What will you do?

        • Gary

          I could answer, but I would prefer not to at this time.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Why?

          • Gary

            Because.

          • Badkey

            You can’t. You got nothing.

          • Gary

            I can.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Because, why?

          • Badkey

            Nah.

          • dacianYYC

            Gary will do something, all right–he’ll finally marry his boyfriend.

            Gary LOVES the penis.

          • Disqusdmnj

            Gary likes to think he’d be justified in executing people. That’s his answer to everything.

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        It will from a legal standpoint

    • http://www.FascistDykeMotors.com/ Katy

      You mean the pro-family people can support families? That would be pretty cool.

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        What a concept, huh?

  • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

    Get over it. Gay couples neither seek nor require your approval.

    • Gary

      We won’t get over it. And they will never have our approval. But they do badly want it.

      • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

        Trust me. Nobody gives a rodent’s rear what you think about their marriage. Gay couples seek the legal right to marry. Argumentum ad populum has never been part of the equation.

        • Gary

          THat is a lie. You very badly want affirmation.

          • Asemodeus

            Has a gay couple ever asked you for permission?

          • Gary

            What do you think “gay pride” parades are for? They are seeing acceptance and affirmation.

          • Badkey

            Why are you watching gay pride parades? I’ve never even been to one.

          • Gary

            I have protested at some.

          • Badkey

            Uh-huh… nice cover!

            I’ve walked blocks out of my way to avoid them.

          • Asemodeus

            Have you been in a gay pride parade?

          • Gary

            No.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “i have protested at some”

            Which ones?

          • Gary

            Some in NC and SC.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Gary, it’s really amazing that you would take the time and energy to attend these gay pride parades, in two different states, and several parades, to “protest”.

            Me thinks thou dost protest too much.

          • pax2u

            may be Gary is a roadie

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Given his stated feelings about homosexuals it is truly an amazing feat that he would choose to go to several gay pride parades.

            Imagine how hard it must have been……….for him to be around all those gay men he so throughly despises.

            What a nut! He busted…….through his distaste in order to spend time around gay men so that he could protest.

            But I’m sure he stood erect……as he made his feelings known.

          • Asemodeus

            Then why complain about them?

          • Gary

            Why not complain? They damage society with their perversion, their disease, their immorality.

          • Asemodeus

            What is actually perverted here is you thinking that your perverted mind gets to decide when other Americans have the right to use their freedom of assembly.

          • pax2u

            Gary wants the Government to execute homosexuals, and some Catholics, and I have the honor to be personally included in Gary’s liquidation list,

      • Badkey

        What will you do?

  • Badkey

    A majority of Alabama’s 67 counties are abiding by law and issuing licenses!!! http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/02/chaos_reigns_in_alabama_as_sam.html

    All things going smoothly with no disruptions!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5rtqswJUNY

    • pastoredsmith

      Forced Federal Power grab. Overriding the will of the voters is WRONG.

      • Phillip Marsh

        You know, it was the WILL of the voters that interracial couples not be allowed to marry. That was overthrown by the courts.

        It was the WILL of the voters to keep blacks and whites segregated, to make coloreds use different entrances, sit at the back of the bus and so forth. That was overthrown by the courts as well.

        It was the WILL of the voters that black people were to be treated as property and sold into slavery. That was also declared unconstitutional.

        So, you think that the will of the majority of voters is right.

        So, does that mean that you condone and endorse slavery, segregation, bans on interracial marriage????

        • pastoredsmith

          Well, Phillip, the more you babble, the more of your ignorance and lack of historical education you exhibit. Race and homosexuality are not related at all.
          Since you are so ignorant, let me educate you. Race is based solely on the skin color in a human being that is completely related to the amount of melatonin in one’s body. Nobody has control over that. It is something we were born with, it is in our DNA. Homosexuality, on the other hand, is a completely chosen lifestyle. It a sin. It is a choice. It is an abomination to God. It is a destructive lifestyle that is bringing this country to its knees right now, and you people simply ignore it.
          May I suggest you go back to school, and pay attention in class this time.

          • Phillip Marsh

            Holy moses what an ignorant fool you are. Homosexuality, like heterosexuality is not a choice. How stupid can one person be?

            With that, I am don’t casting pearls before SWINE! So I am taking the advice of Matthew 7:6.

          • pastoredsmith

            Call names all you wish. It only serves to show your ignorance. I suggest you read Romans 1. It is more fitting to your misguided nonsensical babbling.
            And, as you people are so fond of abusing, what about the “judge not lest you be judged” passage? I won’t misinterpret it. But, I will point out that it is homosexuals who are the haters and judgmental idiots.

          • Phillip Marsh

            Perhaps you should spend more time following the actual teachings of your savior instead of the words of man.

            Matthew 22:35-40 makes it very clear.

          • pastoredsmith

            The ill-spoken advice of a fool. One who misinterprets Romans 1 and “advises” me to pull another group of verses out of context and live by it? No, that is your modus operandi, not mine.

          • Phillip Marsh

            Only a moron ignores what his savior directly says to favor the word of a man instead. There is nothing quoted out of context, just a pathetic simpleton who cherry picks the verses he likes or can use to bash people over the head and ignores the inconvenient verses or verses that make him into a villain.

    • Phillip Marsh

      Your “majority” was 35 out of 67 counties. That is 52.25% – barely a majority.

      Alabama’s ban on same gender marriage was ruled unconstitutional. I am sure you know what that means.

      • pastoredsmith

        Yes, it means a rogue Federal Government is usurping authority that is reserved for states. Your ignorance of American History shows yet again.

        • Phillip Marsh

          You mean like the US supreme court forcing Alabama to grant interracial marriage with the Loving vs Virginia ruling? Good to know what side of that issue you stand on.

          A federal district court has the authority and power to rule that a state law is unconstitutional. You should understand this.

          • pastoredsmith

            The ignoramus speaks again. It was the actions of a single judge that struck down Alabama’s Constitutional Amendment, approved by 80% of the voters in that state that I refer to. The actions of one rogue judge strikes down the will of the people. That is called “Communism.” You should read about it sometime. AFTER you take American History again.

  • http://twitter.com/LWAYNECAMP LWC

    Well I do ‘de-KLAY-ah,’ Masters Beauregard and Otha-Percival, our exquisitely delicate magnolia of a justice is a bit indisposed, and in need of his smelling salts, after a most unfortunate spell upon hearing of his duty this bright, dewy morning of Progress.

    Those seersucker suits just don’t hold up like they used to in this humidity of diversity.

  • pastoredsmith

    This particular episode, like many others in the US, is a takeover of state’s rights by the Feds. Marriage has always been a state controlled thing until these Federal judges went rogue and started striking down state constitutional amendments voted on and ratified by the population of these states. I, for one, am sick of the Federal Government taking control of state’s rights! It is time to reign in the rogue Federal judges, have Congress abolish those courts and reverse these illegal decisions. If this precedent is allowed to stand, then anyone who claims their civil rights are being violated can be considered the same as a “people group” as are homosexuals today and rogue judges can misuse the 14th Amendment to force their will onto the people. This process looks a whole lot like regional governors acting under a king. That’s apparently what this rogue Federal government wants. Let the revolution begin.

    • pax2u

      there was a states rights fight about 150 years ago, did not turn out so well for alabama

      • pastoredsmith

        The Civil War has nothing to do with the claims of homosexuals wanting “civil rights.” A lifestyle choice is not the same as a race of people. Nobody is born homosexual, it is a lifestyle choice. Even homosexual scientific studies prove this beyond any shadow of a doubt. So, your comment is lame and without any merit.

        • pax2u

          so you do not believe in States Rights?

          • pastoredsmith

            So, since you can’t read or are just trying to muddy the water by being stupid, this conversation is over. Come back when you talk sense.

          • pax2u

            do you believe in States Rights,? should Alabama and Mississippi leave the union again?

          • pastoredsmith

            So, you can’t read. You flunked American History. And, your “logic” demands that States Rights means secession from the union? That was your idea. Why don’t you answer your own question.

          • pax2u

            I do remember how the last states rights civil issue turned out about 150 years ago, being that I am from Illinois, I do not think that it worked out so well for Alabama

          • pastoredsmith

            When you get an education, pax2u, come back and join in intelligent discussion. Take your lame and incorrect conclusions somewhere else. I recommend you take American History again. You would learn the truth about the long debate about states rights and federal rights when this country was founded. And, as I already answered prior (you really should read it!), racial rights are a worthy struggle and should have never been taken away. Homosexuality is a choice, not a birth right. But, you refuse to acknowledge that and build your wrong conclusions on that one piece of wrong information.

          • pax2u

            what was the name of your theological seminary?

          • pastoredsmith

            None of your business. It has nothing to do with this “discussion.” Please go away. You lose.

          • pax2u

            so you have no theological education, I understand

          • pastoredsmith

            You understand nothing and know less. Go away!

          • pax2u

            so you are a do it your self preeeeecher, I understand

          • pastoredsmith

            No, I’m a God-called preacher of the Gospel. I pray that God opens your eyes to the hatred you have in your heart and helps you with your unfortunate tendency to deliberately attempt to get people to hate you. It doesn’t work here. Jesus loves you. He has a better plan than the one you live in now. Let go of your hatred of God and accept His plan. You will live a better life if you follow God rather than ridicule Him. You are in my prayers.

          • pax2u

            you told me to go away , yet you post to me

            you say that you are a pastor but you do not acknowledge being in any CHRISTIAN theological seminary

            so who made you a preeeeeeeeeeeecher, you and that man in your mirror?

          • pastoredsmith

            Well, I realized you must hate me, and therefore must have issues with God Himself. You pry and poke at things you think will irritate me. It worked for a minute, but I realized that you are just a person who is filled with anger. It must be terrible to hate people who tell you that you are wrong. Sorry to learn you don’t like preachers….that means you must have been hurt in the past. God really does have a better plan than the misery you must have now, seeing as how you love to attack anyone who believes in Biblical marriage. Give it up! God wants you back, regardless of how people hurt you in the past. He has a better way. Don’t let imperfect, selfish people steal your joy for the rest of your life. Let God heal you. I will pray for you.

          • pax2u

            sorry you are wrong, I do not hate you

            Pastor ed smith, what is the denomination of your Church?

          • pastoredsmith

            I work with all people, regardless of race or denomination. I don’t believe in divisions that man set up that only serve to separate us. And, I’m glad you don’t hate me.

          • pax2u

            what is your denomination? do you have a denomination?

          • Gary

            God has never had him, and I don’t think God wants him now.

          • pax2u

            I love my Christian God, Jesus Christ,

            I pray for fake preeeeechers

          • pastoredsmith

            You cannot love God and ignore His word. The Bible clearly teaches that homosexuality, like its first cousin, adultery, are sexual sins. Call me anything you wish. You know you are wrong. And, please do pray for me, if you can really do that while living in a sinful and rebellious lifestyle. I am certainly praying for you.

          • pax2u

            Pastor, should homosexuals be executed by the Government?

            I will pray for you and ask you to pray for me

          • pastoredsmith

            Of course not. Criminals are executed. Sexual sin is a sin but not a crime. Homosexuals who choose to live together is akin to man and woman who choose to shack up. It is morally wrong, but not illegal. I have never advocated any of that. And, if you refer to how some in the past who did, let me say that many people do things in the name of Christ that He did not deserve the blame for. Marriage is, however, a cornerstone of society. To change the definition of marriage is to damage society, especially when it is done by Federal Judges overriding the will of the people.

          • pax2u

            you should speak with Gary,

            he wants the Government to execute homosexuals, and some Catholics, and Me,

            I believe in and support the Traditional Marriage of One Man and One Woman

          • pax2u

            I must apologize, I edited my posts that were made in a un Christian way, I am sorry

        • James Grimes

          Disregards anything the clown says. He is usually incoherent and his comments are never relevant to the topic being discussed.

    • pax2u

      george wallace fought for States Rights at the University of Geogia

    • Badkey

      Loving v. Virginia. States trumped, and not for the first time.

      NEXT!

      • pastoredsmith

        Right. Interracial marriage has nothing to do with homosexuality. Race is determined by birth. Homosexuality is determined by choice. Period. And, states rights trumped by rogue Federal Judges is wrong. You would change your opinion if “right wingers” announced they were “born that way” and demanded “civil rights” because of their status. It is the exact same principle. You people really need to read the scientific studies done by homosexuals. They repudiate the claim that homosexual is genetic. it is a choice, not a birth right and the Federal judges are not treating it this way.

        • Badkey

          It has everything to do with Feds trumping states on marriage. The original post is factually wrong.

          As for genetic, who cares? Precedent is set by the choice of religion.

          • pastoredsmith

            Wrong. Precedent is set by lifestyle choices. And, the original post is factually accurate.

          • Badkey

            “Lifestyle choices”? Like being Christian? It gets all kinds of special rights.

            Precedent is set… the “choice argument” is moot. With the hideous choice to follow a religion getting so many special rights, there is no need to demonstrate any genetic basis for being gay.

            Watch and see! It’s happening right before you NOW.

          • pastoredsmith

            Yes, unfortunately, the tidal wave of evil and reprobate lifestyles is sweeping the world like a flood. And, the day of God’s judgment will come unless genuine revival takes place. BTW. The First Amendment is about freedom of speech AND freedom of religion.
            Also, if you run on the premise that no genetic basis is required, then any new “people group” can be devised simply by whining and crying in the same manner homosexuals have done over the past several decades. Once that happens, they will have to get the same protected recognition as homosexuals. A precedent is being set. It is a dangerous one because anyone can then apply for equal protection under the much abused 14th Amendment that has nothing to do with LIFESTYLE CHOICE.
            And, the war is not over. In the end, you and your ilk will regret spitting in the face of God. I pray you see the error of your ways and repent while you still can.

          • Badkey

            I see you have a very negative attitude and opinion to go with it. That’s sad.

            Your god doesn’t own marriage… it is an issue of civil law and your god don’t matter.

            I’m not referring to the 1st amendment… see the Civil Rights Act for the special rights I speak of… there are plenty of others, but that’s a good start. Just a choice… a LIFESTYLE CHOICE. Nothing else.

            Precedent is set. Thanks for that.

            I don’t fear your god or the mythology that props it up. Sorry.

          • Gary

            You will learn to fear God. Trust me on that.

          • Badkey

            Why do you grovel in fear based on stories written by men?

          • Gary

            I don’t.

          • Badkey

            Sure you do. You just told me I’d learn to fear god so it’s obvious the only reason you grovel before it is out of fear.

          • Gary

            I don’t grovel before God. I worship Him. Not the same thing at all. And the day will come when you will wish you had never been born.

          • pastoredsmith

            Actually, I have a great attitude. I do know when our culture is being overrun by evil. And, it is right now. One day, you will see, but by then, it will likely be too late. That is the sad part.
            As to God, He is not “my God.” He is God, whether you believe or not. You are a fool if you don’t believe in Him (Psalms 14:1).
            A new and dangerous precedent is being set by those homosexuals and atheists who wish to overrun this country, right along with Muslim terrorists. Call it what you will, but it is truth.

            One day you will bow before God and realize then it was your twisted and warped mind that invented the mythology that you can ignore and spit on God. No props needed here. I stand on Christ and His Word. You stand where? On your own imagination and “logic?” Right. It will tumble into the abyss in your future unless you repent and accept Christ.

            Oh, yes, a “lifestyle choice” is not the same as a protected class of people under the Constitution. Your ilk redefine the whole legal process and think you got by with it. All you did is destroy our country. You are a great part to blame.

          • Badkey

            Religion is just a choice… a “lifestyle choice”.

            Watch and see my friend… watch and see!

            PS: How is our country being destroyed? Is it that you’re not “special” anymore?

          • pastoredsmith

            I actually agree with you on one point. “Religion is just a choice…a ‘lifestyle choice.” Christianity is not just another religion. It is truth. It is the only source of absolute truth. But, you know that, and that explains your anger and hatred towards we who believe in the Bible.
            Let go of your hate. It makes you look really stupid.

          • Allah

            It’s going to be a much safer, freer, and cleaner world after the rapture. Hope you’re in heaven really soon!

          • Gary

            Wrong again. After the rapture of God’s people, God is going to pour his wrath on you and those remaining. It will be something you would rather miss.

          • Allah

            As long as I don’t have to spend eternity surrounded by disgusting christian filth like you I’ll be happy. It’s bad enough having to share the planet with you freaks, much less an afterlife.

          • Gary

            You will not be surrounded by Christians in eternity. But you won’t be happy either.

          • Allah

            Yeah, I think I know what makes me happy or not. Typical christian goon, always telling other people what they like. Kill yourself, freak.

          • Gary

            No, I don’t want to do that. But if you are still alive at a certain time in the future, you will want to die, and wish you could.

          • Allah

            Nah. Like most normal people, I don’t look forward to death the way the followers of some Jewishslut’s kid do.

          • Gary

            If you are still alive at a certain time in the future, you will try to kill yourself.

          • Magister_militum_praesentalis

            What makes you think there is going to be something like the “rapture?”

          • Gary

            They are not interested in repenting.

        • SFBruce

          I’m curious what scientific literature you’re aware of which claims sexual orientation is a choice, and I don’t really care whether the work was done by a gay or straight person.

          • pastoredsmith

            I’m not interested in your education or the lack of it. There is a wonderful tool on the Internet called “Google.” It’s all there. BTW. There is no such thing as a “gay person” or a “straight person.” Only a choice in behavior.

          • SFBruce

            I asked you for a source because I don’t believe there is any proof that sexual orientation is a choice. I know you believe homosexuality is wrong, which is your right, but the reality is the current scientific consensus is that, while sexual orientation isn’t entirely genetic, it’s not a choice. If you believe that consensus is wrong it’s encumbent on you to provide some evidence to support your view.

  • Norma Ross

    I’m always happy to hear about good judges, since a bad judge took my co-signer off my renter’s lease and then my renter went under- ground like the mole he is.

  • thoughtsfromflorida

    Governor Wallace refuses to follow federal court ruling and allow segregation of Alabama schools.

    Wow. Some things don’t change.

    • pax2u

      is there a certain thing about Alabama, is it trapped in the past,

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        They are stuck in: “i don’t want other people to have rights if I don’t like it” Waaaa Waaaa Waaaa

        • pax2u

          reminds me of crazy gary from north carolina, who wants the government to execute homosexuals, some Catholics, and he has added me to hist list,

          the Last Trump keeps talking about giving people more rope, sounds like an invitation to a lynching

          • Gary

            We all know that you are on the side of the homosexuals and fully support ssm.

          • Badkey

            And we know you’re losing.

          • Gary

            But you don’t see the big picture. You see but a sliver.

          • pax2u

            Gary I can support the Traditional Marriage of one man and one woman,

            and still not want the Government to execute homosexuals,

            it really is possible

          • Gary

            Cut the crap. You NEVER have a word to say against ssm, or homosexuals. All of your comments are directed toward protecting homosexuals.

          • pax2u

            Gary, I support the Traditional marriage of one man and one woman, and you want to have the Government execute homosexuals.

            Yes I would protect homosexuals from the insanity of those who want them executed by the Government

            Gary do you want North Carolina Baptists that eat pork BBQ and do not observe the Old Testament Saturday Sabbath to also be executed by the Government?

          • Gary

            If you were not such a dimwit, you would know that there is no chance that the current government is going to execute homosexuals. That won’t happen unless the muslims take over, or until Christ returns. Then why to you keep harping about it as if I might be able to make it happen?

          • pax2u

            so are you disappointed Gary that the Government will not execute Homosexuals?

          • Gary

            Do you object to God telling Moses to execute homosexuals? Since that is where I learned that God wants them to be executed, why is it that you never have anything to say about God’s command to Moses. Do you think God was wrong? It is obvious that you do. Then why do you never say so?

          • pax2u

            Gary I am a Christian, of the New Covenant and the New Testament

            Hebrews 8:13 – In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away.

            Gary do you want the Government to execute the Baptists of North Carolina that eat pork BBQ and do not observe the Old Testament Saturday Sabbath?

          • Gary

            There is no covenant involved. It is a civil penalty for an immoral act. Was God right to command the civil penalty, or wrong?

          • pax2u

            so you deny the Christian New Testament New Covenant, sad

            Hebrews 8:13 – In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away.

          • Gary

            If the civil penalty has gone away, does that mean that homosexual behavior is no longer a sin? If the covenant God gave the Jews is over, are the Ten Commandments over? Is adultery a thing of the past?

          • pax2u

            should the Baptists of North Carolina who eat pork BBQ and do not observe the Old Testament Saturday Sabbath be executed?

          • pax2u

            do you live under that old covenant or the New Covenant of Jesus Christ?

          • Gary

            You answer my questions first.

          • pax2u

            the behavior may be a sin, but not the person
            love the sinner and hate the sin

            I believe in the Traditional marriage of one man and one woman

            any physical relations outside of the Traditional Marriage is a sin, any, Hetero, or Homosexual

            Lust of anyone outside of Traditional Marriage of one Man and one woman is a sin, by anyone

            I believe in the new covenant of the New Testament

            your turn now Gary

            Gary do you want the Government to execute the Baptists of North Carolina that eat pork BBQ and do not observe the Old Testament Saturday Sabbath?

          • Gary

            So you believe that homosexual behavior “may be a sin”?? You seem to be in doubt about it. But you believe the civil penalty has been repealed? That does not make sense. There is no Biblical reason why the sin should remain, but the civil penalty does not. Explain that to me.

          • pax2u

            Gary is it a sin not to observe the Old Testament Saturday Sabbath?

          • pax2u

            Has there been a civil penalty to execute Homosexuals in the United States?

            or are you speaking of a Muslim country like saudi arabia or Iran, which country are you from gary, saudi arabia or iran?

          • Gary

            I am not aware that there has ever been capital punishment in the USA for homosexual behavior.
            Now, back to my questions. Explain to me how the civil penalty for homosexual behavior has been repealed by God, but the moral penalty(Hell) remains. Where is that in the Bible?

          • pax2u

            answer gary

            Gary do you want the Government to execute the Baptists of North Carolina that eat pork BBQ and do not observe the Old Testament Saturday Sabbath?

          • Gary

            You have not answered my questions yet.

          • pax2u

            “Now, back to my questions. Explain to me how the civil penalty for homosexual behavior has been repealed by God,”

            A civil penalty or civil fine is a financial penalty imposed by a government agency as restitution for wrongdoing

            Gary when has there ever been a civil penalty for being a homosexual?

          • pax2u

            Gary do you even know what a civil penalty is?

          • Gary

            You asked about the execution of homosexuals, not other civil penalties.

          • pax2u

            Gary you said this

            “Explain to me how the civil penalty for homosexual behavior has been repealed by God,”

            A civil penalty is a monetary fine that is designed to compensate for harm. It is distinct from a criminal penalty, since its purpose is not designed to punish the person who the penalty is imposed on. Instead, it is designed to make the other party, who was damaged or injured in some way, whole.

          • pax2u

            Gary, I do not think that you understand the difference between a civil penalty and a criminal penalty

          • pax2u

            poor Gary, you are the one who wants the Government to execute homosexuals

            what is the civil penalty for homosexuality, how much is the monetary penalty

            Gary you really do not understand the difference between a civil and criminal penalty do you, really?

          • pax2u

            Gary do you want the Government to execute the Baptists of North Carolina that eat pork BBQ and do not observe the Old Testament Saturday Sabbath?

            still not able to answer? Gary?

          • pax2u

            Gary I am glad that you only want a civil penalty, a fine for homosexuals,

          • pax2u

            so little gary what is the civil penalty the monetary fine for being a homosexual, $1.00 is it payable to your Klan

          • The Last Trump

            How very sad that Pax2u has come forward to publically support LGBT groups with EVERY post. Before Almighty God Pax has renounced his “Christianity” and taken his stand with those who despise God and the Bible. Most of his up-votes, if not ALL, come from the LGBT supporters trolling this site, which is a very telling testimony before God and man making it absolutely undeniable about the side Pax has chosen.
            May God have mercy on the immortal soul of the apostate Pax2u.

            Very sad to see Pax. 🙁

          • pax2u

            sad that you and your Klan want to execute homosexuals, is that why you keep referring to giving people more rope?

            very sad

          • pax2u

            A civil penalty or civil fine is a financial penalty imposed by a government agency as restitution for wrongdoing

          • pax2u

            Gary do you want the Government to execute the Baptists of North Carolina that eat pork BBQ and do not observe the Old Testament Saturday Sabbath?

          • pax2u

            in what state is being a Homosexual punishable by execution? is that is North Carolina, where Baptists can eat pork bbq and not observe the Saturday Sabbath of the Old Testament?

          • Spoob

            Trumpy and his rope, eh? And his hood, and white sheet?

          • pax2u

            Gary now wants a civil penalty for homosexuality

            but poor sad, and not very bright Gary does not understand the difference between a civil and a criminal penalty

            A civil penalty is a monetary fine that is designed to compensate for harm.

            so how much does Gary want to fine homosexuals?

            poor, poor dumb Gary

          • Spoob

            Gary is getting raked over the coals here. Which is nice but Grimes, Trumpy and Fundisi deserve to as well.

          • pax2u

            they will defend poor sad, and not very bright gary, as long as little gary also hates who they hate

          • The Last Trump

            How very sad that Pax2u has come forward to publically support LGBT groups with EVERY post. Before Almighty God Pax has renounced his “Christianity” and taken his stand with those who despise God and the Bible. May God have mercy on the immortal soul of the apostate Pax2u.

            Very sad to see Pax. God forgive you. 🙁

          • Spoob

            I am very impressed. Pax2u is a model Christian, showing love where others (cough cough) show only hatred.

          • pax2u

            sorry trumpy I support the Traditional Marriage of one man and one woman

            Unlike Gary and his klan I do not support the Government executing homosexuals,

            But poor angry Gary is so ignorant he cannot understand the difference between a civil penalty, a fine, and a criminal penalty

            frightening that poor crazy gary has a gun,

          • Spoob

            Pax refuses to uphold hate and bigotry. That is the kind of Christianity you should be getting behind, not this hate and judging.

  • James Anderson

    State employees who refuse to do their job should be dismissed. And by the way, it’s time now to lose the scare quotes around ‘married’. I’m married. We married in 2003. Doesn’t affect anyone else in any way shape or form. Just makes our lives a bit easier and more stable. Neither I nor my husband are perverts or immoral. Neither does our marriage have anything to do with anyone’s religion because marriage is, and always has been, a civil institution. In fact, the Early Church did not conduct marriage services because they considered such rites to be pagan. Good luck to those Alabamians trying to get married. Justice delayed is justice denied.

    • Gary

      In order to have a husband, you must be a woman.

      • Badkey

        That is factually a lie, Gary.

        • Gary

          Only a man can be a husband, and only a woman can be a wife. A marriage happens when a man marries a woman. A man cannot be a husband unless he has a wife. And a woman cannot be a wife unless she has a husband.

          • Badkey

            Merriam-Webster:

            “: a married man : the man someone is married to”

            See? It’s not complicated.

          • Gary

            And a man is only married if he has a wife, who must be a woman.

          • Badkey

            Dictionary.com

            “a married man, especially when considered in relation to his partner in marriage.”

            Very simple concept.

          • Gary

            A man cannot marry a man. A woman cannot marry a woman. A marriage must have both a husband and a wife.

          • Badkey

            You’re legally wrong, sweetie.

            Your denial changes nothing.

          • Gary

            And your claiming to have a husband does not mean you do.

          • Badkey

            Legally, again, you are incorrect.

            By the definitions posted, you are incorrect.

            How do you deal with your frustration at the world, Gary?

          • Gary

            I refuse to go along with immorality and insanity.

          • Badkey

            Good for you, Gary! Then nothing changes for you.

          • pax2u

            maybe gary will move to his perfect world, saudi arabia

      • Badkey

        Merriam-Webster:

        “: a married man : the man someone is married to”

        See?

  • Ronni Taylor

    This Probate Judge should be fired and heavily fined or imprisoned. He is a bigot and a lawbreaker. You people supporting him are at best ugly bigots!

    • Eric InATX

      This guy isn’t a probate judge. He is the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama! Just goes to show how Alabama people think…

      • James Grimes

        He was elected twice to that position. The people of Alabama have spoken. Those of us who live outside Alabama have no say in the matter.

        • Badkey

          But we get to laugh when he gets fired for ethics violations again.

          • James Grimes

            You act like an idi0t. Bye.

          • Badkey

            Buh-bye, sugar!

          • pax2u

            A civil rights group on Wednesday filed a judicial ethics complaint against Alabama’s controversial Supreme Court Chief Justice, Roy Moore, saying his comments urging judges to disregard a recent ruling striking down the state’s gay marriage ban were “encouraging lawlessness.”

            “We have gone down this road before during the civil rights movement,” Cohen said. “The chief justice is trotting out the same tired – and disproven – states’ rights arguments that were used to disenfranchise African Americans.”

      • pax2u

        this is a good reason why Supreme Court justices should not be elected and then be expected to up hold the constitution

  • Badkey

    Why was the other article about Moore taking judges who issued marriage licenses to court deleted from this site?

    • SFBruce

      Probably because Moore himself is backtracking. He had made the announcement on his Facebook page, but has since deleted it. Gov. Bentley had made it clear he wasn’t going to punish probate judges, and that this issue should play out in accordance to the law. Not exactly strong support for Judge Moore.

  • Phillip Marsh

    Hey, all y’all that are against same gender marriages guess what, you have a new supporting group … the KKK.

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2015/02/kkk-supports-alabama-chief-justice-roy-moores-fight-against-gay-marriage/

    • http://twitter.com/LWAYNECAMP LWC

      Great find!

      It’s only fitting they all link arms in their next parade.

    • Gary

      Do you know who supports ssm? You think you are in good company?

      • Badkey

        Better than your kin in the Klan, Gary!

        • Gary

          Not at all better. You are a bunch of perverts. Maggots.

          • Badkey

            *KISSES*

          • Gary

            Go to Hell. And you will.

          • Badkey

            You’re so cute when you’re angry.

  • Badkey

    22 counties and rising! One by one, they’re realizing that they’re not only in violation of federal law, but… they’re fighting a losing battle! Great things are happening!

    • Gary

      What federal law are they in violation of? Congress has not passed a law legalizing ssm. And the federal courts have no authority to pass laws. So what law are they violating?

      • Badkey

        Oh, Gary, you poor dear. You must feel that the whole world is against you. Bans on SSM in Alabama have been overturned… it’s not complicated.

      • James Grimes

        Gary, this clown’s comments are meaningless. He has a “husband.”

        • Badkey

          Yup! Full legal recognition by both the state and federal governments!

          Why does this seem to bother you? Does it harm you in some way?

        • Gary

          He does not have a husband. Only a woman can have a husband.

          • Badkey

            Your denial of law is SO cute!

          • Gary

            To Hell with that law.

          • Badkey

            Awwwwwwww…

          • pax2u

            angry Gary has spoken in favor of an armed revolution against the Government, the same Government that he wants to execute Homosexuals, some Catholics, and Me

            but then Gary does not understand the difference between a civil penalty and a criminal penalty

            poor sad angry Gary

          • Badkey

            I know… he wants a US theocracy…

            I’m not sure his nasty attitude would be welcome even then.

          • pax2u

            just like Saudi Arabia and Iran, his idea of the perfect world

          • Gary

            If God asked you why you supported homosexuals and ssm, what would you say?

          • pax2u

            I would say that I support the Traditional Marriage of One Man and One Woman

            and at the same time I condemn those who want the Government to execute homosexuals, some Catholics and me,

            I believe in the new Testament and the new Covenant

            Matt 22

            …37And He said to him, “‘YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.’ 38″This is the great and foremost commandment. 39″The second is like it, ‘YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.’…

          • Gary

            It is funny that you are the only one on here who never gets attacked by the queers or their supporters for opposing ssm. THat is probably because they don’t believe you really oppose ssm.

          • pax2u

            just because I do not want the Government to execute homosexuals,

            and Gary you are not smart enough to understand the difference between a civil penalty and a criminal penalty

          • Badkey

            Maybe it’s because he’s not a hateful little cretin.

          • pax2u

            Gary, do you understand the difference between a civil penalty and a criminal penalty

          • Gary

            I understand the difference between capital punishment and other types of punishment.

          • Badkey

            Then you do not understand the difference between a civil penalty and a criminal penalty.

            That’s sad.

          • pax2u

            what would the civil penalty be for being a homosexual Gary?

          • Gary

            The penalty God required was for homosexual behavior, and it was death.

          • Badkey

            Do you support that in our society today? Death for homosexuals?

          • pax2u

            you really do not understand what a civil penalty is do you?

          • Badkey

            Sad, isn’t it?

          • pax2u

            frightening really, and he says that he has a gun, and sometimes he has spoken for an armed revolution against the government, that he wants to execute homosexuals, some Catholics, and I am proud to say that he has added me, personally to his liquidation list,

            but sad little gary does support fascists, so no surprise, really

          • pax2u

            Gary pax2u 16 hours ago

            There is no covenant involved. It is a civil penalty for an immoral act. Was God right to command the civil penalty, or wrong?

            *************************************************************

            how much is the civil penalty, the monetary fine for being a homosexual, and is the fine paid to your Klan?

          • Gary

            There will be a theocracy world-wide within 20 years.

          • Badkey

            Uh-huh… same nonsense for 2,000+ years.

            Good luck!

          • Gary

            No luck needed.

          • Badkey

            That’s what they said 2,000 years ago.

          • Magister_militum_praesentalis

            Who is going to set up this theocracy and how were you given such specific chronological details?

  • Peter Leh

    Theses
    judges have been around since slavery and jim crow. These people are
    still alive and continue to etch their name eternally on the wrong side
    of history with all those before against equal protection.

  • BarkingDawg

    Roy gets smacked down again.