Appeals court overturns federal gay-marriage law
A federal appeals court in Boston has ruled unanimously that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional, in effect reaching the same conclusion as the Obama Justice Department.
The case is almost certainly destined to be decided by the Supreme Court, a fact the appeals court noted in delaying implementation of its ruling until the Supreme Court gets a shot at it.
The ruling is certainly founded in logic and reason. The court ruled that the federal government cannot confer benefits on those who were married under Georgia law or Kansas law and then deny benefits to those married under Massachusetts law, which allows gay couples to marry.
In one example, federal law allows the spouses of military veterans to be buried alongside them in military cemeteries. But DOMA would deny that right to gay spouses of veterans. The court found that violates both the right of gay Americans to equal protection under the law and violates the authority of states to regulate marriage.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
538 comments Add your comment
Normal Free...Pro Human Rights Thug...And liking it!
May 31st, 2012
1:11 pm
Off topic, but how does this count on the unemployment rolls??
http://www.papercutsinc.com/
josef
May 31st, 2012
1:11 pm
Why can’t I own a Canadian…the Bible says I can…
http://www.humanistsofutah.org/2002/WhyCantIOwnACanadian_10-02.html
Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette
May 31st, 2012
1:11 pm
Gwinnett Mom
No punkin – you got it wrong. Leviticus was telling nomadic tribesmen that laying with a man instead of their wives was adultery.
Ever consider same sex couples were designed by God so that they could take care of the children that are orphaned?
You’re gonna fight are ya’? Well, well….aren’t I just shivering
in my sandals.
They BOTH suck
May 31st, 2012
1:11 pm
Paul
I figured that out quickly, just attempting to show her that she is choosing which of “God’s laws” to apply and not apply
Paul
May 31st, 2012
1:11 pm
Peter
“But then why are the GOP folks making it their business ?”
You may want to think about the party alignment of African Americans and check our their support or opposition to gay marriage, particularly thru their churches, before you go down that path.
Doggone/GA
May 31st, 2012
1:12 pm
“So…. does anyone see any negative implications for religious institutions if gay marriage is held to be a right without regard for religious belief and practice?”
The only one I can see is that a presiding religious authority could no longer be deputed to do a legal function. They could perform any sort of church ceremony they like, but it would not be a legal marriage until the couple is married by a legal authority.
Peter
May 31st, 2012
1:12 pm
Paul……. What about religions that don’t have a theology?
Please name a few you are speaking about.
Recon 0311 2533
May 31st, 2012
1:12 pm
The ruling has no effect on states that don’t recognize same sex marriage and doesn’t rule on the question of do homosexuals have a constitutional right to marry. This will go to the SCOTUS where it has always been expected to end up.
godless heathen
May 31st, 2012
1:12 pm
the Lord forbids bloody lacerating and tattooing (Lev 19:26); 9)
That one I can go along with. I’m sick of piercings and body ink.
I'm a liberal and believe everything I read and nothing the other side comes up with...cause we're smart and they are not
May 31st, 2012
1:13 pm
How about Axlerod getting heckled and booed off the Stage in BOSTON this morning. Not Mississippi, or South Georgia, but Boston. Now I tell you Libs on here this because IT WON’T SHOW UP ANYWHERE on the news that YOU watch or listen to….but the tape & audio don’t lie. Do you think they pulled a Sharpton and had a bus bring them in from Alabama……. A bus load of redneck racist I mean….LOL
ty webb
May 31st, 2012
1:14 pm
if a “homophobe” tree of color falls in the woods and people refuse to hear it, does it still make a noise?
Joe Hussein Mama
May 31st, 2012
1:14 pm
Peter — “Please name a few you are speaking about.”
Any nontheistic religion would do. Or something pretheistic, like animism.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
May 31st, 2012
1:14 pm
I’m sick of piercings and body ink.
I’ll second that!
Peter
May 31st, 2012
1:15 pm
Paul….. You may want to think about the party alignment of African Americans and check our their support or opposition to gay marriage, particularly thru their churches, before you go down that path.
I am not sure of your meaning here.
josef
May 31st, 2012
1:15 pm
Skipper
@ 1:03
I never coveted my neighbor’s wife either…now his ass…?
Joe Hussein Mama
May 31st, 2012
1:15 pm
Ima Librul — “Now I tell you Libs on here this because IT WON’T SHOW UP ANYWHERE on the news that YOU watch or listen to….but the tape & audio don’t lie.”
I see the coffeemaker on your ward only had decaf this morning.
Gwinnett Mom
May 31st, 2012
1:16 pm
Dont put words in my mouth. I am against all things that God is against. It make me sick 2 see some of you think this is OK. U all R prolly against prayer in schol 2. I no I wont see U in heaven.
Common Sense isn't very Common
May 31st, 2012
1:16 pm
I spoke to g0d this morning concerning this issue
And SHE said.
Lighten Up Francis
Adam
May 31st, 2012
1:17 pm
ty: Are there more people who are NOT old white males than old white males who do not support this decision? Is there any group that has more a majority opposed, compared to old white males? Because if so, THAT is your argument against someone saying that when they die off the attitude in this country will change. Not “a couple of black people don’t agree TOO”
godless heathen
May 31st, 2012
1:17 pm
josef,
You can’t own a Canadian because you could never afford the beer.
(BTW, I love linkee.)
Peter
May 31st, 2012
1:19 pm
Any nontheistic religion would do. Or something pretheistic, like animism.
All the examples I saw……Examples of Animism can be found in forms of Shinto, Serer, Hinduism, Buddhism, Pantheism, Paganism, and Neopaganism…….. Can be traced back to man…..How can they not be man made up ?
Personally I like Buddhism, and Eastern philosophy which states all living things are connected.
Gwinnett Mom
May 31st, 2012
1:19 pm
And where R some of my fellow christans to defend me? I no there R more like me I see them ever Sunday.
Peter
May 31st, 2012
1:20 pm
Funny statement….. I am against all things that God is against.
Really ????? Just what is God against ?
Don't Tread
May 31st, 2012
1:20 pm
“I’m sick of piercings and body ink.”
+1
Mr_B
May 31st, 2012
1:21 pm
“Why can’t I own a Canadian…the Bible says I can…”
Oh, alright, but I don’t know how you can stand those plaid flannel caps with the ear flaps.
Paul
May 31st, 2012
1:22 pm
Doggone/GA
There are a couple of concerns. To name one: the California Supreme Court has held marriage is a ‘fundamental right.’ As such, it could be held action could be taken against religious institutions that refuse to place adoptive children in gay households, regardless of whether or not the institution receives government funds to aid in the adoption process.
There are more examples, which is why it wold be helpful to early on carve out how such a right does not take precedence over private religious practice.
They BOTH suck
May 31st, 2012
1:22 pm
“And where R some of my fellow christans to defend me? I no there R more like me I see them ever Sunday.”
I would imagine that some of your fellow Christians that are on here, regardless of political leanings, are appalled that you are attempting to group them into your narrow mindedness.
Aquagirl
May 31st, 2012
1:22 pm
And where R some of my fellow christans to defend me?
Check the men’s restroom at Hartsfield, honey. Lots of them there.
Adam
May 31st, 2012
1:22 pm
Oh, alright, but I don’t know how you can stand those plaid flannel caps with the ear flaps.
Ownership means you can also tell them what to wear.
Peter
May 31st, 2012
1:22 pm
“I’m sick of piercings and body ink.”
WOW….. allot of judging going on here ! That is definitely NOT Christian now is it !
Talking Head
May 31st, 2012
1:22 pm
I care as much about this headline as I do who wins the NHL Finals…go ahead and post another opinion piece
Normal Free...Pro Human Rights Thug...And liking it!
May 31st, 2012
1:23 pm
Something on Native Americans and Gays…
The term “Two-Spirit” refers to a belief among some tribes that there are people who manifest both masculine and feminine spiritual qualities. According to Native American scholars, many tribes once revered Two-Spirits, viewing them as a third gender with a special spiritual connectedness. In these tribes, Two-Spirits filled important tribal roles as counselors, storytellers and healers.
This belief, scholars have also observed, has been eroded in many places by the imposition of Judeo-Christian views of homosexuality as sinful.
http://www.imdiversity.com/villages/native/dialogue_opinion_letters/pns_gay_twospirits_0305.asp
josef
May 31st, 2012
1:23 pm
GWYNNETTE
“. I no I wont see U in heaven.”
That’s true, gotta be there yourself…everbody talkin’ ’bout heaven ain’t goin’ there…
getalife
May 31st, 2012
1:24 pm
It was on cnn I’m a con.
Normal Free...Pro Human Rights Thug...And liking it!
May 31st, 2012
1:24 pm
…and another…
http://www.portlandmercury.com/portland/two-spirits-rising/Content?oid=24792
I'm a liberal and believe everything I read and nothing the other side comes up with...cause we're smart and they are not
May 31st, 2012
1:24 pm
uh oh……………1st qtr corporate profits released today and they were the lowest in 3 years.. ( not that a lib would care, who wants the pie divided up equally ever month). Not a good climate for hiring…….But Obama at least has gotten gas prices down for us….although it was crickets and blame when they were going up…….Just more good news for this President. Maybe he’ll address the evils of capitalism and profits on his radio broadcast this Saturday. I’ll know I’ll be listening.
They BOTH suck
May 31st, 2012
1:24 pm
“I no I wont see U in heaven.”
About the time you ask why isn’t the a/c on, is about the time you will realize that you didn’t get to heaven.
Joe Hussein Mama
May 31st, 2012
1:24 pm
Gwinnett Mom — “U all R prolly against prayer in schol 2.”
I think you should have been more for STUDYING in school and less for praying in it.
Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette
May 31st, 2012
1:25 pm
Gwinnett Mom
No you won’t see us in heaven…..
That’s a given for faux Christians like yourself.
Fellow Christians? Hardly. We true followers of the fisherman will
call you out for the Pharasee-ette you are!
Adam
May 31st, 2012
1:25 pm
josef: everbody talkin’ ’bout heaven ain’t goin’ there…
I was just there the other night fighting Diablo and the minions of hell… oh sorry I didn’t realize you weren’t talking about a video game XD
Cosby
May 31st, 2012
1:25 pm
Rights..what rights…Or is this another special interest group receiving special privalegs….wonder what the Gay’s will think after a few divorces….I’ll bet someone will be screaming fowel…and by the way, why do gay’s get the right to promote thier interest groups in lessons in schools – see Maryland and no other group does…oh that is right special privaleges for a special group horse squeeze
Adam
May 31st, 2012
1:26 pm
But Obama at least has gotten gas prices down for us
Finally a conservative gives Obama credit for something!
Saving that post to remind everyone on here to follow this example: give Obama credit where credit is due!!! (:lol:)
Normal Free...Pro Human Rights Thug...And liking it!
May 31st, 2012
1:27 pm
Gwinnett Mom
May 31st, 2012
1:16 pm
Now I KNOW you’re really Bill Orvis White in drag!
Paul
May 31st, 2012
1:27 pm
Peter
“Paul……. What about religions that don’t have a theology?
Please name a few you are speaking about.”
Don’t mean this to be insulting, but that response tell me you’re of the group that makes broad-brush, generalized sound-good comments without having a firm grounding in the terms or concepts being used.
Rather like people who say ‘homosexuality is against nature” who when told there are species that change gender in certain situations, say ‘oh yeah? Name some!”
when the real issue is the broad-brush generalization without fully understanding what is being said.
barking frog
May 31st, 2012
1:27 pm
get a life
no you are not that is jm.
josef
May 31st, 2012
1:27 pm
OKAY, TESTING MY CUT AND PASTE SKILLS…
Why Can’t I Own a Canadian?
October 2002
Dr. Laura Schlessinger is a radio personality who dispenses advice to people who call in to her radio show. Recently, she said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22 and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following is an open letter to Dr. Laura penned by a east coast resident, which was posted on the Internet. It’s funny, as well as informative:
Dear Dr. Laura:
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other specific laws and how to follow them:
When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord – Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness – Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?
I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination – Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this?
Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?
I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? – Lev.24:10-16. Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging.
Your devoted fan,
Jim
Joe Hussein Mama
May 31st, 2012
1:28 pm
Cosby — “Rights..what rights…Or is this another special interest group receiving special privalegs….”
I am against special rights for theists and I am pleased to see that you are also against special rights for them.
I'm a liberal and believe everything I read and nothing the other side comes up with...cause we're smart and they are not
May 31st, 2012
1:28 pm
Adam, do I need pliers to get the hook out of your mouth?
Mr_B
May 31st, 2012
1:28 pm
“IT WON’T SHOW UP ANYWHERE on the news that YOU watch or listen to…” yeah ’cause none of us ever read the NYT.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/31/axelrods-anti-romney-message-gets-drowned-out/
Damned librul press always buries all the stories….
Mr_B
May 31st, 2012
1:28 pm
“IT WON’T SHOW UP ANYWHERE on the news that YOU watch or listen to…” yeah ’cause none of us ever read the NYT.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/31/axelrods-anti-romney-message-gets-drowned-out/
Damned librul press always buries all the stories….
Doggone/GA
May 31st, 2012
1:29 pm
“And where R some of my fellow christans to defend me?”
As I Christian I find your opinions and attitudes as expressed here to be indefensible.
Peter
May 31st, 2012
1:29 pm
“I no I wont see U in heaven.” HA HA HA….. We are all going to the same place Hitler, Dick Cheney, the next door neighbor, and priests are going…… heaven and hell are here on earth…..
Example ……Jail is Hell….the beach or mountains Heaven….. Being with your daughter, son, family…. Heaven.
Mr_B
May 31st, 2012
1:29 pm
Sorry about the double post
I'm a liberal and believe everything I read and nothing the other side comes up with...cause we're smart and they are not
May 31st, 2012
1:30 pm
Well I’ll be Mr B.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
May 31st, 2012
1:30 pm
How does one scream “fowel, and what the hell is a “special group horse squeeze”?
Doggone/GA
May 31st, 2012
1:31 pm
“There are more examples, which is why it wold be helpful to early on carve out how such a right does not take precedence over private religious practice”
Is placing children for adoption a religious function or a secular one? If secular, then churches who engage in adoption placement should be held to the same laws and regulations are are any other adoption agencies. If they don’t like it, they can get out of the adoption business.
Peter
May 31st, 2012
1:31 pm
Paul. You can’t insult me, I would have to be in my Ego for that to happen.
Paul
May 31st, 2012
1:31 pm
Peter 1:15
I was referring to your “YES to this…….. Bottom line There isn’t a thing about being Gay that is in any way, shape, or form, religions business.
But then why are the GOP folks making it their business ?”
In other words, it isn’t just the GOP who wants to make it their business.
iTiSi
May 31st, 2012
1:32 pm
Maybe, if elected, these judges will reach the same fate those did in Iowa. The people kicked them right off the bench. Anyway this will go to the US Supreme Court where it will lose 5-4. Use to think there was nothing lower than college professors(liberal bunch) but now think the liberal court judges may rank lower than a snakes’ bottom.
Aquagirl
May 31st, 2012
1:32 pm
I think you should have been more for STUDYING in school and less for praying in it.
If you can pray away the gay, you can pray away mangled English.
St Simons - an island of rainbows
May 31st, 2012
1:33 pm
14th Amendment – The End. sheesh, why are we still on this?
josef, if you don’t hire the village people to play your reception,
you don’t have a hair on your -ss
I commend the conservative regulars on this blog. As a rule, you seem
to be ahead of the curve on this one, or at least near the curve,
whatever.
ragnar danneskjold
May 31st, 2012
1:33 pm
This ruling is more interesting than my initial reaction reflected. Because there is a state law on the books contrary to the Federal law, the Federal law cannot stand. Interesting jurisprudence. Sounds like an embarrassment arising for the leftists, again.
godless heathen
May 31st, 2012
1:34 pm
Peter: WOW….. allot of judging going on here ! That is definitely NOT Christian now is it !
I’m not a Christian, but I’m not judging either. One can have as many piercing and tatoos as they like – as long as they stay the f*ck at home.
ty webb
May 31st, 2012
1:34 pm
“you can pray away mangled English.”
someone’s never watched the “Reverend” Al Sharpton’s show.
Peter
May 31st, 2012
1:34 pm
Yes to this…….. In other words, it isn’t just the GOP who wants to make it their business.
In your example….. we do find some of the most judgmental, and non tolerant folks who call them selves followers of “God” or Christians….. They are making a mockery of what they believe.but hey we all want to twist stuff to fit our agendas now don’t we ?
Paul
May 31st, 2012
1:34 pm
Gwinnett mom
“Dont put words in my mouth. I am against all things that God is against”
I don’t think anyone is trying to put words in your mouth. I think they are asking you how you can hold some Old Testament passages to be authoritative and binding yet ignore others that offend our sensibilities. Perhaps you can explain?
josef
May 31st, 2012
1:35 pm
Oh, good, Peter and Paul are at it. Where’s Cousin JC to moderate this?
And, no, y’all Gwynnette is NOT a Christian, she’s a member of the Haredi underground!
Joe Hussein Mama
May 31st, 2012
1:35 pm
Aquagirl — “If you can pray away the gay, you can pray away mangled English.”
Get thee BEHIND me, Dangling Participles!
John Birch
May 31st, 2012
1:36 pm
Good ruling, hope SCOTUS will see it the same way. Aquagirl – Hanging out in those men’s bathrooms at Hartsfield again? (else how would you know….)
ragnar danneskjold
May 31st, 2012
1:36 pm
The way the Supreme Court will look at the ruling: as Federal law normally trumps state law, is there a way to uphold the Federal law by invalidating the state law? I think I see one such way.
Paul
May 31st, 2012
1:36 pm
Peter
“Personally I like Buddhism, and Eastern philosophy which states all living things are connected.”
Too bad Bosch isn’t still around. He’d have you joining some of us in a little bit of pagan dancing naked in the moonlight ceremonies -
Peter
May 31st, 2012
1:36 pm
godless heathen ……. as long as they stay the f*ck at home.
Sounds like you have an issue, and perhaps should follow the advice you want to give others !
Personally I don’t care for tattoo’s never have…so I never got one and let it go.
Common Sense isn't very Common
May 31st, 2012
1:37 pm
Josef
Yes you can own a Canadian.
Just be aware that the beer is expensive and they want medical care for FREE
I'm a liberal and believe everything I read and nothing the other side comes up with...cause we're smart and they are not
May 31st, 2012
1:37 pm
If you libs will just hang on for say 25 years until everyone from say 55 to 75 today IS DEAD, you can pass all the new laws you want and have at it. The last group of voters with morals and patriotism who believe in all the things that made this country great, warts and all, will be gone. The ” MTV” party on crowd will vote for anything you want. just hang on.
That Black Guy
May 31st, 2012
1:37 pm
getalife
May 31st, 2012
1:09 pm
Do you hear that?
That is the sound of our cons being marginalized as kooks
_______________________________________________________
Even the ones that AGREE with this ruling?
straitroad
May 31st, 2012
1:38 pm
That’s nonsense. The federal government currently has laws on the books that allow preferences based on race. It’s called affirmative action. Typical liberal hypocracy.
Joe Hussein Mama
May 31st, 2012
1:38 pm
R. Danneskjold — “This ruling is more interesting than my initial reaction reflected. Because there is a state law on the books contrary to the Federal law, the Federal law cannot stand. Interesting jurisprudence. Sounds like an embarrassment arising for the leftists, again.”
When you actually take the time to read the decision, you should recognize just how wrong you are.
DOMA created a separate-but-equal status, which is expressly unconstitutional per prior SCOTUS decision.
Doggone/GA
May 31st, 2012
1:38 pm
“Dont put words in my mouth. I am against all things that God is against”
You know you have made your God in your image, when your God hates the same things you do. (unknown)
Adam
May 31st, 2012
1:40 pm
Even the ones that AGREE with this ruling?
Depends, were they against it before they were for it?
That Black Guy
May 31st, 2012
1:40 pm
Paul
May 31st, 2012
1:11 pm
Peter
“But then why are the GOP folks making it their business ?”
You may want to think about the party alignment of African Americans and check our their support or opposition to gay marriage, particularly thru their churches, before you go down that path.
________________________________________________________________________
But, Paul, that doesn’t fit Peter’s “either/or” mindset.
Adam
May 31st, 2012
1:40 pm
The federal government currently has laws on the books that allow preferences based on race. It’s called affirmative action
Someone doesn’t understand affirmative action.
weetamoe
May 31st, 2012
1:42 pm
Well since it took so long for the most brilliant coolest bravest intellectual to evolve, the rest of his constituents should not be hectored into hurrying that process. If they are too backward, their intrepid AG will once again remind them that that old separation of church and state thingy does not apply to Obama supporters. And even though quattro de mayo has passed, we should still be celebrating the fact that in another generation or two most people will look like Jorge Zimmerman. I, for one, welcome that.
They BOTH suck
May 31st, 2012
1:42 pm
Rags
Are you against gay marriage?
Figured with that “libertarian” Ayn Rand streak, it wouldn’t make a difference to you?
Paul
May 31st, 2012
1:44 pm
Gwinnett mom
“And where R some of my fellow christans to defend me? I no there R more like me I see them ever Sunday.”
josef
You get a gold star for ‘cut and paste’!
Doggone/GA
“s placing children for adoption a religious function or a secular one? If secular, then churches who engage in adoption placement should be held to the same laws and regulations are are any other adoption agencies. If they don’t like it, they can get out of the adoption business”
That’s really not the issue that would be before the court. The religion in question could have an adoption service for its members but still face legal challenge for denial of rights.
Maybe some of us just see God’s expressions a bit differently that you do -
I'm a liberal and believe everything I read and nothing the other side comes up with...cause we're smart and they are not
May 31st, 2012
1:44 pm
Adam, what’s not to understand…..And i’m all for not denying anyone anything because of a skin color. I am against 2 people of different colors say going after one job and it’s given to one based on color over say education, experience and qualifications etc.
They BOTH suck
May 31st, 2012
1:45 pm
Rags
Sort of like Boortz when he drops the hammer on callers who call in with anti gay anything rants………..
Paul
May 31st, 2012
1:45 pm
Oops.
I need cut n past lessons from josef.
Gwinnett mom
“And where R some of my fellow christans to defend me? I no there R more like me I see them ever Sunday.”
Maybe some of us just see God’s expressions a bit differently that you do -
barking frog
May 31st, 2012
1:46 pm
The KJV Bible does not
address same sex marriage
as best I remember except
maybe between Jonathan
and David but since I don’t
care I’m not looking it up.
jm
May 31st, 2012
1:46 pm
Obama was a super duper pothead. Surprise. Explains a lot.
Maraniss works for the Post and his pot-smoking scoop, which included details of Obama’s college-era dope-smoking club and waste-no-weed rules for inhaling it, never made the front of his own paper.
The story landed on page A6, and Maraniss’s reporting included colorful details of Obama’s pot-smoking prowess: “As a member of the Choom Gang, Barry Obama was known for starting a few pot-smoking trends. The first was called ‘TA,’ short for ‘total absorption.’ To place this in the physical and political context of another young man who would grow up to be president, TA was the antithesis of Bill Clinton’s claim that as a Rhodes scholar at Oxford he smoked dope but never inhaled,” Maraniss writes in his book.
curious
May 31st, 2012
1:46 pm
People can say what they want, but Jay’s columns produce at least twice the comments that the rest of the columnists in the AJC.
Surprising how many people think so lowly of the AJC, yet are drawn to Jay’s writing like moths to a candle.
Jay, you should have a cookout so we could all meet each other. Make sure you have the police and paddy wagon(s) on hand.
Paul
May 31st, 2012
1:47 pm
Peter 1:31
Good to know. The written word of the blogosphere is not the best for accurate communication.
Doggone/GA
May 31st, 2012
1:47 pm
” The religion in question could have an adoption service for its members but still face legal challenge for denial of rights.”
That still doesn’t make adoption a RELIGIOUS function. And I don’t see how, if the religion is adopting children from parents OF their religion and TO parents of their religion, how there could ever be a denial of rights.
ragnar danneskjold
May 31st, 2012
1:48 pm
Dear Both @ various times, good afternoon, you are right, I have no dog in this fight. You correctly perceive that I think governments should not be in the business of regulating relationships between or among adults, that the only arguable government interest arises in the protection of the fruit of the marriage (no, that is not an anti-gay slur, I am talking about children.) Nevertheless, the ruling is pretty vacuous, in that it allows a state law to control the validity of a Federal law. Still think the Supreme Court is likely to call the Boston Court foolishly short-sighted.
josef
May 31st, 2012
1:49 pm
St Simon’s
Yeah, YMCA, Havah Nagilah and Come and Get Your Love medley, eh?
Adam
May 31st, 2012
1:50 pm
I am against 2 people of different colors say going after one job and it’s given to one based on color over say education, experience and qualifications etc.
And THAT is proof you don’t understand affirmative action.
ty webb
May 31st, 2012
1:51 pm
ATTENTION JAY BOOKMAN…ATTENTION JAY BOOKMAN.
well well, what do we have here?
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/05/msnbc-produced-antimitt-romney-video-124924.html
Joe Hussein Mama
May 31st, 2012
1:52 pm
TBS — “Figured with that “libertarian” Ayn Rand streak, it wouldn’t make a difference to you?”
Rags outed himself as a circumstantial statist LONG before today.
In fact, he was totally down with Terri Schiavo’s parents and Congress in getting all up in her medical decisions — over the objections of Mr. Schiavo.
ragnar danneskjold
May 31st, 2012
1:53 pm
The Boston Court ruling would have a prayer in court – isn’t that a clever joke, given the Federal jurisprudence on prayer – if the Massachusetts law preceded DOMA. The Massachusetts law, enacted in light of the prior-existing DOMA, is a loser in such a fight.
Adam
May 31st, 2012
1:54 pm
Time to change the subject, as we are 6/7 pages in: http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/30/paying-rent-on-minimum-wage/
Paul
May 31st, 2012
1:54 pm
Peter 1:34
“we do find some of the most judgmental, and non tolerant folks who call them selves followers of “God” or Christians….. They are making a mockery of what they believe.but hey we all want to twist stuff to fit our agendas now don’t we ?”
Can I get a rousing “Amen!”?
josef
“Oh, good, Peter and Paul are at it. Where’s Cousin JC to moderate this?”
Hate to break it to you, but we don’t need JC, we’re waiting for Mary –
That Black Guy 1:40
I’d guess it’s more a case of something that just hadn’t occurred to him.
After all, isn’t that why we blog? To learn new things and challenge our assumptions?
(cue laughter in 3… 2…. 1….)