Supreme Court Halts Gay Marriage in Utah

While state appeals ruling that effectively legalized it

  • Share
  • Read Later

Like TIME on Facebook for more breaking news and current events from around the globe!

Jim Urquhart / Reuters

Isaac Troyo, left, and his partner Jed Mecham get married at the Salt Lake County Government Building in Salt Lake City, Utah, Dec. 23, 2013.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday stopped same-sex marriage in its tracks in Utah, where state officials have been trying to block the practice after a federal judge effectively legalized it last month.

The high court granted a request from Utah for an emergency order to put gay marriage on hold while another court considers the state’s appeal, the Associated Press reports. That follows the Dec. 20 ruling from U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby, which struck down a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage because he said it violated couples’ constitutional rights. Previous requests from the state for a stay had failed in lower courts.

More than 900 gay and lesbian couples have already married since the initial ruling.  The status of those unions following the Supreme Court’s ruling is unclear. The Supreme Court stay will remain in effect until an appeals court rules on the matter.

MORE: Explore an Interactive Timeline of the U.S. Gay Rights Movement

[AP]

154 comments
SkepticalofPC
SkepticalofPC

I don't think being gay is natural.  If it were a matter of genetics it would be bread out of the population in short order.  Also those gay friends of mine with whom I have discussed this have all been hurt by the  promiscuous lifestyle that appears to be part of the gay subculture.  Until a majority of gay people live lives that differ from this disease spreading stereotype, you will not convince many of us who have gay friends, even if you

ban the Bible and the Torah.  

RamRanch
RamRanch

The Bible & Torah should be banned!

Here are several really loving excerpts from the Torah; the first five books of the Old Testament in the bible -- perhaps read to the congregation on Friday night at a synagogue or a Sunday morning church in the meadow.

1.Kill any friends or family that worship a god that is different than your own.  Deuteronomy 13:6-10

2.Kill all the inhabitants of any city where you find people that worship differently than you.  Deuteronomy 13:12-16

3.Kill everyone who has religious views that are different than your own.  Deuteronomy 17:2-7.

Rabbinical / Priestly rules:

Leviticus 21:17-18 … “No one who is blind or lame or has a defect or any blemish may approach to offer the bread of his God.”

Leviticus 18:22… “You are not to go to bed with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination ….”

Rabbis; the pope and churches fully aware that Leviticus 18:22 applies to rabbis and priests … refuse to remove this stigma maliciously persecuting gays.  Kids are being bullied into suicide …!

Being left-handed – being black or being gay is just as natural.  It is a sometimes rare occurrence to fall in Love and to hold that person in your heart and be loved in return ... it is something that should be celebrated!   If it is love between two guys or two girls … all the better … it takes even more courage to defend that LOVE!

www.HolyFaux.com

It is written; so therefore it shall be? We are the chosen people; such a wicked fantasy.  

Lebow-Ski
Lebow-Ski

Hypocrisy of Marital Relationships: So many Christians try to rationalize this but it is clear that a true follower of Jesus can neither divorce someone nor marry someone who is divorced.  There is an exception to the rule, however.  If spouse commits adultery, divorce is permissible.  On the same token, the Bible also says that anyone who obtains a divorce and marries another is in adulterer.  Remember that 80% of this country is Christian yet we have a 50% divorce rate.  A majority of divorces are a result of irreconcilable differences, not adultery, which implies that Christians are again practicing selective morality.  

How many Christians are working on a second, third or fourth marriage? 

1) “So they are no longer two but one flesh.  What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder” (Matthew 19:6 & Mark 10:9).

2) “Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery” (Matthew 5:32, 19:9 & Luke 16:18).

3) "Whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery" (Matthew 5:32).

4) "...whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her" (Mark 10:11 & Luke 16:18), which applies to women as well (Mark 10:12).

NormanDostal
NormanDostal

Skeptical-you obviously are completely ignorant about genetics

GrantHaertter
GrantHaertter

@SkepticalofPC You are an arrogant idiot.  If it were a matter of genetics it would be bred (not bread!) out of the population in short order?  How can that be when heteros just keep creating more and more of us.  My parents were as hetero as it gets so they passed none of themselves onto me.   There are at least 25 physiological differences that distinguish us from heteros.  We often appear after a woman has given birth to several before us, so that we may be nature's way of curbing the population.  That is after all a noble cause in this overpopulated planet.

Second, you don't know many gay people.  The vast majority of my friends aren't unhappy folks spreading disease out there, the are stable and dedicated professionals and family members.  My husband and I have shared 30 wonderful years together, and every year just keeps getting better.  We spend all of our free time with each other, and we have a bond I seriously doubt that you are enjoying in your sad holier-than-thou life.

toddhartman10001
toddhartman10001


Ignorant... so very Ignorant... you're not gay, so how would you know ?   It's doubtful you actually have any gay friends, other than those maybe "trying" gay-conversion therapy, because people like you put such a negative spin on being gay.

Lebow-Ski
Lebow-Ski

@SkepticalofPC 

I don't or can't expect to get into the mid or body of a Gay person to report back on whether or not your statement is true.

I do know this much; nobody has the right to tell consenting adults who they should marry based on religious axioms. That is a violation of Church and State.

UrnsSo
UrnsSo

@RamRanch

You really should have kept reading into the New Testament. 

Chosun1
Chosun1

@Lebow-Ski -- Well, then let's outlaw divorce, except in the case of proven adultery: Done.  Easy.  No problem.  Next issue.  Really, you raise a good point:  Too many Christians go crazy over homosexual sin but have no problem with heterosexual sins of fornication and rampant divorce: both of which are practices that are clearly condemned as sins in the Bible.  

SkepticalofPC
SkepticalofPC

@Lebow-Ski @SkepticalofPC I disagree.  Marriage has always been regulated by the state.  Your statement would make no sense to the authors of the constitution that you seem to be using as an authority.  I don't think there is any area of legislation that is not informed by one's world view, whether that world view is Christian, Hindu, or hedonistic.  For you to say that Christians can't vote what they think is healthy public policy is to say that you have a right to your opinions but that we don't have a right to ours.   That is cheating.  


And you have not addressed a central question of concern to me, and that is the self destructive nature of promiscuity.  It is just as self destructive for straight people as gay.  If you write to convince those you disagree with, you need to address questions that they raise.  


NormanDostal
NormanDostal

In Mathew Jesus says children who curse their parents must be put to death-do we keep that one or-?

roknsteve
roknsteve

@UrnsSo @RamRanch The New Testament was written by Romans such as Josephus and his son.  The Romans made up the christian religion to control their citizens and stop them from converting to Judaism.  Do some research. 

Lebow-Ski
Lebow-Ski

@UrnsSo@RamRanch

He does not need to bother. We have been living in a Christian world for almost 2000 years. 

Our world is defined by the actions and hypocrisy of Christianity and it (Christianity) like so many religions can only be practiced correctly if one gives up everything that makes us human (which is an impossibility and quite immoral to ask of us BTW).

No, we have lived under the axioms of the Bible for long enogh without questioning the very foundations of it's supposed and extremely subjective "truth".

Give me one good reason why anoyone should submit to a an absolute athority based on an ancient Bronze Age text recommending of misogyny, rape, slavery, sexism, tribalism, etc... (authors largely unknown).

This will not do in the 21st century.

 

Lebow-Ski
Lebow-Ski

@Chosun1@Lebow-Ski@SkepticalofPC

Ahhh but you see I am convinced that the most honest and peaceful way to live is Anarchy.

Seriously, I'm a confirmed Anarchist. But that is another discussion entirley.

The state is Violence. The state is Slavery :-)

Lebow-Ski
Lebow-Ski

@SkepticalofPC@Lebow-Ski  

I never said to ban those books. I don't put much stock in them but I would defend your right to religious freedom with my life.


I want those pesky Evangelical Christian Theocratic Fascists to get their dirty little hypocritical fingers out of Government. 

Guilty as charged on that count your honor :-)


"I would defend the liberty of consenting adult creationists to practice whatever intellectual perversions they like in the privacy of their own homes; but it is also necessary to protect the young and innocent."

Arthur C. Clarke

Chosun1
Chosun1

@Lebow-Ski @SkepticalofPC -- We all have to tell people how to live their lives to a certain extent.  Failure to do that would mean no rules, no laws and no standards of any kind.  Anyone who says they don't try to legislate morality or interfere with other peoples' lives isn't thinking too hard:  The whole point of democratic society (or any system of law and governance) is to impose the will of some individuals on others.  Think a little harder.

SkepticalofPC
SkepticalofPC

@Lebow-Ski @SkepticalofPC   Lol!  Maybe It was someone else in the feed who wanted to ban the Bible and Koran.  I have probably done you a disservice.  Though I do think it was you that wanted certain religious leaders to but out of public discourse.


SkepticalofPC
SkepticalofPC

@Lebow-Ski @SkepticalofPC  You are the one that would restrict Christians from public discourse and ban the bible and the Koran.  Then you want to pose and an honest open minded person who won't tell anyone what to do.  

Lebow-Ski
Lebow-Ski

@SkepticalofPC@Lebow-Ski

Yes, it is a proven fact and therefore "true" fact that religion is a means to cotrol and indoctrinate children.

Ask any psychologist about "Christian or Catholic "Guilt".

UrnsSo
UrnsSo

@Lebow-Ski

So at least you are honest in admitting you don't really know.  Have you ever looked for truth in Christianity?  Somehow I doubt it.  Hard to find something you never looked for; even if it is right in front of your face. 

It has been interesting. 

Lebow-Ski
Lebow-Ski

@UrnsSo@Lebow-Ski@SkepticalofPC  

Prophecies Christians Use to Verify Jesus as the Messiah, Yet Clearly Fail:

4) The gospels (especially Matthew 21:4 and John 12:14-15) claim that Jesus fulfills the prophecy of Zechariah 9:9.  But the next few verses (Zechariah 9:10-13) show that the person referred to in this verse is a military king that would rule "from sea to sea".  Since Jesus had neither an army nor a kingdom, he could not have fulfilled this prophecy.

5) Matthew (Matthew 2:17-18) quotes Jeremiah (Jeremiah 31:15), claiming that it was a prophecy of King Herod’s alleged slaughter of the children in and around Bethlehem after the birth of Jesus.  But this passage refers to the Babylonian captivity, as is clear by reading the next two verses (Jeremiah 31:16-17), and, thus, has nothing to do with Herod’s massacre.

6) John 19:33 says that during Jesus’ crucifixion, the soldiers didn’t break his legs because he was already dead.  Verse John 19:36 claims that this fulfilled a prophecy: "Not a bone of him shall be broken."  But there is no such prophecy.  It is sometimes said that the prophecy appears in Exodus 12:46, Numbers 9:12 & Psalm 34:20.  This is not correct.  Exodus 12:46 & Numbers 9:12 are not prophecies, they are commandments.  The Israelites are told not to break the bones of the Passover lamb, and this is all it is about.  And Psalm 34:20 seems to refer to righteous people in general (see verse Psalm 34:19, where a plural is used), not to make a prophecy about a specific person.

7) "When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt."  Hosea 11:1.  Matthew (Matthew 2:15) claims that the flight of Jesus’ family to Egypt is a fulfillment of this verse.  But Hosea 11:1 is not a prophecy at all.  It is a reference to the Hebrew exodus from Egypt and has nothing to do with Jesus.  Matthew tries to hide this fact by quoting only the last part of the verse ("Out of Egypt I have called my son").

8) "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."  Micah 5:2 The gospel of Matthew (Matthew 2:5-6) claims that Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem fulfils this prophecy.  But this is unlikely for two reasons.

    A) "Bethlehem Ephratah" in Micah 5:2 refers not to a town, but to a clan: the clan of Bethlehem, who was the son of Caleb’s second wife, Ephrathah (1 Chronicles 2:18, 2:50-52 & 4:4).

    B) The prophecy (if that is what it is) does not refer to the Messiah, but rather to a military leader, as can be seen from Micah 5:6.  This leader is supposed to defeat the Assyrians, which, of course, Jesus never did.  It should also be noted that Matthew altered the text of Micah 5:2 by saying: "And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Judah" rather than "Bethlehem Ephratah" as is said in Micah 5:2. He did this, intentionally no doubt, to make this verse appear to refer to the town of Bethlehem rather than the family clan.

Lebow-Ski
Lebow-Ski

@UrnsSo@Lebow-Ski@SkepticalofPC  

Prophecies to Identify the Messiah, Which Jesus Does Not Fulfill:

1) Matthew 1:23 says that Jesus (the messiah) would be called Immanuel, which means "God with us."  Yet no one, not even his parents, call him Immanuel at any point in the bible.

2) The Messiah must be a physical descendant of David (Romans 1:3 & Acts 2:30).  Yet, how could Jesus meet this requirement since his genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 show he descended from David through Joseph, who was not his natural father because of the Virgin Birth. Hence, this prophecy could not have been fulfilled.

3) Isaiah 7:16 seems to say that before Jesus had reached the age of maturity, both of the Jewish countries would be destroyed.  Yet there is no mention of this prophecy being fulfilled in the New Testament with the coming of Jesus, hence this is another Messiah prophecy not fulfilled.

Lebow-Ski
Lebow-Ski

@SkepticalofPC@Lebow-Ski 

I am an agnostic (although I suspect religion is man made). I do not claim to know what I cannot. I do not tell people how to live their lives. It is a FAR more honest and healthy approach to living life.

Lebow-Ski
Lebow-Ski

@SkepticalofPC@Lebow-Ski  

If all this were true: 

"The historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, the historicity of the Bible, Biblical prophecy, Its cohesiveness, it relevance, answered prayers, and modern day miracles.  I could email you a paper with evidence if you would like, or I can elaborate on any of the above if you genuinely want to know."


then every single human being on the planet would believe as you do.


The fact is, they don't and never will. Why? Because their religions make the exact same claims (without evidence).


SkepticalofPC
SkepticalofPC

@Lebow-Ski @SkepticalofPC The historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, the historicity of the Bible, Biblical prophecy, Its cohesiveness, it relevance, answered prayers, and modern day miracles.  I could email you a paper with evidence if you would like, or I can elaborate on any of the above if you genuinely want to know.


Now would you answer my question?


UrnsSo
UrnsSo

@Lebow-Ski

Can you quote Jesus for a lie?

You seem to know that at least some of the 10 Commandments are true; but you deny Christianity based on flawed humans. 

SkepticalofPC
SkepticalofPC

@Lebow-Ski @SkepticalofPC 


How is it that you are the source of truth?


When you say things like "Fear and Religion go hand in hand."  Everyone who has religion without fear knows that you are the source of anything but truth.


Lebow-Ski
Lebow-Ski

@SkepticalofPC@Lebow-Ski 

I agree, I do however enjoy speaking truth to power.

Fear and religion go hand in hand BTW.


Regardless, society IS becoming more tollerant and you will have no choice but to sit back and see if the things you fear will come to pass.


I suspect they will not.

SkepticalofPC
SkepticalofPC

@Lebow-Ski I am just trying to tell you that not all "Christians" concerns are limited to what the Bible says.  If you don't address the actual concerns that people have but just attack the Bible you will just be singing to the choir of those who already agree with you.  You will convince no one.  



Lebow-Ski
Lebow-Ski

@SkepticalofPC

I don't need to address your need to control the "self destructive promiscuity" you say is inherently part of the Gay experience because it's just an opinion of yours.

Have you considered the fact that because Gays had to live in the closet for so long, because they were viewed as sexual deviants by a religious society that the tail wagged the dog and that they became what you describe them as?

Perhaps in a more enlightened and tolerant society they will be just as normal (whatever that means in a constantly changing society) as you or anyone else.


I don't really care. Gays do not bother me. They should be free to marry.

UrnsSo
UrnsSo

@Lebow-Ski @UrnsSo @RamRanch

You can chose your semantics; still there is a "faith" that life has a purpose beyond breathing air and eating food. 

UrnsSo
UrnsSo

@Lebow-Ski @UrnsSo @RamRanch

Jainism believe their religion started prior to Buddhism and Hindu.  Regardless, all these religions believe in an order to the universe with beings that are more knowledgably than humans. 

Lebow-Ski
Lebow-Ski

@UrnsSo@Lebow-Ski@RamRanch 

NO, Brahmanism was the religion widely practiced at the time of the Buddha.

Jainism is a sub-branch of the Hindu Faith.

The "Dharma"  is merely an assiduous practice. 

Do Buddhists have particular beleifs? Of course. But the Bhuddha did not take a position one way or another on matters of the unknown.


Buddhism only concerns itself with matters of objective reality.



UrnsSo
UrnsSo

@Lebow-Ski @UrnsSo @RamRanch

Dharma is often considered the order of the Universe. 

Besides, Buddhism came from Jainism which clearly believes in higher power. 

Lebow-Ski
Lebow-Ski

@UrnsSo@Lebow-Ski@RamRanch 

"Dharma" is not a higher power. It is a teaching. 

Buddhism is an education, not a religion.

Please concede that you don not have all the facts on this one.

UrnsSo
UrnsSo

@Lebow-Ski @UrnsSo @RamRanch

Buddhism is diverse with many branches.

Dharma is the higher power for many Buddhist.

Jainism is probably the oldest form and clearly a Pagan religion with many gods.     

Lebow-Ski
Lebow-Ski

@UrnsSo@Lebow-Ski@RamRanch 

There are millions and millions of Buddhists who have built societies much older than the Christian societies.


And Buddhism does not claim a higher power. It is an agnostic philosophy of life, not a religion (look up the definition of religion).


So your statement is largely false.

UrnsSo
UrnsSo

@Lebow-Ski @UrnsSo @RamRanch

You do realize that this is the 21st Century since the birth of Christ.

Even so, we can't name of a single civilization that did not believe in a higher power.   State of the art science of 100 years ago is now considered junk.  Yet the teachings of Christ have remained unchanged for 2,000 years and have divided time for all of mankind.