Unelected liberal activist judge strikes down heterosexuality.

[TheDrunkenScot]

Re: Unelected liberal activist judge strikes down heterosexuality

STATES RIGHTS ARE GREAT!
EXCEPT WHEN THOSE STATES THEN DECIDE THEY DON'T WANT TO BE FAR-RIGHT EXTREMIST NUTS LIKE US! THEN THEY'RE REALLY BAD AND WE SHOULD TAKE THEM AWAY FROM THEM! JUST LIKE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WE BITCH ABOUT!

[Oakland "Reb" Griner]

Re: Unelected liberal activist judge strikes down heterosexuality

All that legal mumbo jumbo really implicates them Joo lawyers, don't it?!?!?


I bet there was a big homo orgy in New York City last night for all the Rabbis and lawyers!

[Pastor Isaac Peters]

How long before heterosexuals in Messyjewsex are shipped off to FEMA concentration camps or even hauled before death panels?

From the JYT:

Judge Topples U.S. Rejection of Gay Unions

BOSTON — A federal judge in Massachusetts found Thursday that a law barring the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, ruling that gay and lesbian couples deserve the same federal benefits as heterosexual couples.

* * *

In the case brought by Attorney General Martha Coakley, Judge Tauro found that the 1996 law, known as the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, compels Massachusetts to discriminate against its own citizens in order to receive federal money for certain programs.

The other case, brought by Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, focused more narrowly on equal protection as applied to a handful of federal benefits. In that case, Judge Tauro agreed that the federal law violated the equal protection clause of the Constitution by denying benefits to one class of married couples — gay men and lesbians — but not others.

* * *

“This court has determined that it is clearly within the authority of the commonwealth to recognize same-sex marriages among its residents, and to afford those individuals in same-sex marriages any benefits, rights and privileges to which they are entitled by virtue of their marital status,” Judge Tauro wrote in the case brought by Ms. Coakley. “The federal government, by enacting and enforcing DOMA, plainly encroaches upon the firmly entrenched province of the state.”

Yes, we believe in states' rights, but not when the concept is twisted like this.