Friday, July 14, 2006

Judges Support Gay Marriage Ban In TN

Strike up another loss for the ACLU of TN. The ACLU tried to file a lawsuit saying that a vote on the upcoming '06 election ballot was not done correctly. The only thing they could find "constitutionally wrong" was the fact that the bill was given to the General Assembly a month and 18 days after it was "due."
"Tennessee's proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, which supporters touted as a way to keep the issue out of the hands of "activist judges'' in the state, is being challenged in court.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee announced Thursday that it has filed a lawsuit in Davidson County Chancery Court over the way lawmakers took up the resolution, which was passed overwhelmingly earlier this year and sent to voters.
The lawsuit charges that the state failed to meet notification requirements as outlined in the state Constitution.
... According to the lawsuit, the text of the amendment was not published six months before the General Assembly election as required. The text was published by the secretary of state on June 20, or four months and 12 days before the Nov. 2 election."

That lawsuit has been STRUCK DOWN! And I must say I'm glad that the judgment comes from a state where most of the judges probably have actually read their bible;
"If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination." (Leviticus 20:13) states it best with this statement;
"To give sanction to homosexual marriage would be to give approval to that lifestyle, which the Bible clearly and consistently condemns as sinful.
... Homosexual marriage is a perversion of the institution of marriage and an offense to the God who created marriage. God forbids and condemns homosexuality, so He clearly is opposed to homosexual marriage."

Think about that for a second. A CHURCH-SANCTIONED homosexual marriage being ok? I have nothing wrong with a STATE-sanctioned civil union which would give the same rights to the couple as a marriage, but what bothers me is the fact that the government/liberals are trying to force the church to do something that it clearly disapproves of.

So here's my thoughts on the issue:
Marriages which are performed in a church and recognized by the church and the state should be one man and one woman.
Marriages which are performed at the courthouse, and are recognized by the state, but not the church can be man and man, or woman and woman.
Both would have the same benefits, rights, and things of that nature.

Linked on: OTB