decision is in, Gay marriage now legal

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
84,530
39,620
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
Oh no doubt!! As far as the family unit goes--a lot of the destruction of the family unit comes when mom and dad harbor ill feelings in a divorce. I know blended families who are AMAZING with each other and I know families who despise each other. It is that "HATE" that destroys the family unit. I work with many broken families in poverty and honestly, if I knew the answer as to how to fix it, I could win a Nobel prize and probably become the most famous person in the world. Unfortunately, some people aren't open to the help or want the change. It's the craziest thing I have ever witnessed.

I believe in Jesus and was raised as a Christian. I don't go to Church because I don't feel welcomed there because of some of my beliefs. That fact will NOT make me lose faith in Christ, though. It puzzles me that the same people who I always hear say, "It's all part of God's Plan" are now the ones who seem to have lost ALL TRUST in Him. I've always struggled with that "God's Plan" thing because I don't think that God gives children cancers that kill them at age 3 or causes teenagers to drown in rivers or old people die from Alzheimer's. That is a concept that I have always struggled with. I believe in the power of prayer. I've tried to talk to people I consider "religious scholars" before about all of my questions but have not gotten the answers I seek. So, I put my FAITH in the LOVE that you can find in Jesus. Faith, Hope and Love--right? I ask myself, "what would Jesus REALLY do? I just believe he would LOVE.

Anyway, this discussion has been a good one. I enjoy everyone's viewpoints. I loved Selma's very long post, haha. That particular Probate Judge who has gone viral nationwide for his quotation of the Alabama Code section that says he "MAY" issue marriage licenses, not that he "SHALL" is from my County. It will be interesting to see what happens with that. He is a devout Christian man who has very strict viewpoints, many that I disagree with. He spoke at my best friend's fathers funeral this week and I absolutely LOVED his sermon. I could absolutely listen to him preach every day. Even though we have very different opinions about gay marriage, he knew the perfect things to say at this funeral. I am proud that he is my friend and I hope that this whole marriage license debacle doesn't affect his family. He really is a good man.

Ok. Now I'm done. Thanks for the therapy session, Tide Fans!! :)
Good luck with that in federal court, since no alternative issuing agency is specified in the Code. Also, since 1867, that provision in 3-1-9 has been held to mean that the power in PJs is basically state-wide, not that they have the power to withhold a license, unless the persons cannot be legally married (incest, minority, etc.) (Gender no longer counts.) His ploy has been tried before in the last 150 years and lost. So, he'll lose, but he won't be paying for his defense - you will. Since the other counties are maintaining that the authority is not discretionary, I wouldn't be surprised to see a quick AG ruling to resolve the conflicts. If not, as I said, the federal courts will brush it aside...
 

tide power fan

All-SEC
Nov 26, 2011
1,424
20
57
Good luck with that in federal court, since no alternative issuing agency is specified in the Code. Also, since 1867, that provision in 3-1-9 has been held to mean that the power in PJs is basically state-wide, not that they have the power to withhold a license, unless the persons cannot be legally married (incest, minority, etc.) (Gender no longer counts.) His ploy has been tried before in the last 150 years and lost. So, he'll lose, but he won't be paying for his defense - you will. Since the other counties are maintaining that the authority is not discretionary, I wouldn't be surprised to see a quick AG ruling to resolve the conflicts. If not, as I said, the federal courts will brush it aside...
I think the door is open now as long as it's two consenting adults, I mean why should we care right incest, long as they or of age it don't affect me, isn't that what we are saying? Anything goes For sure think more than one husband wife etc. Just saying
 

bamabelle1991

All-American
Jan 1, 2009
4,040
179
87
South Alabama
Good luck with that in federal court, since no alternative issuing agency is specified in the Code. Also, since 1867, that provision in 3-1-9 has been held to mean that the power in PJs is basically state-wide, not that they have the power to withhold a license, unless the persons cannot be legally married (incest, minority, etc.) (Gender no longer counts.) His ploy has been tried before in the last 150 years and lost. So, he'll lose, but he won't be paying for his defense - you will. Since the other counties are maintaining that the authority is not discretionary, I wouldn't be surprised to see a quick AG ruling to resolve the conflicts. If not, as I said, the federal courts will brush it aside...
Thanks for this. It is the answer to a question that some of us attorneys down here have been wondering about!!

I think the door is open now as long as it's two consenting adults, I mean why should we care right incest, long as they or of age it don't affect me, isn't that what we are saying? Anything goes For sure think more than one husband wife etc. Just saying
Except that incest, polygamy and statutory rape are illegal. Being gay isn't. That is the difference.
 

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
84,530
39,620
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
I think the door is open now as long as it's two consenting adults, I mean why should we care right incest, long as they or of age it don't affect me, isn't that what we are saying? Anything goes For sure think more than one husband wife etc. Just saying
You don't have to worry about that until the SCOTUS legalizes incest, so I wouldn't lose sleep over it...
 

BamaInBham

All-American
Feb 14, 2007
4,465
2,110
187
Thanks for this. It is the answer to a question that some of us attorneys down here have been wondering about!!


Except that incest, polygamy and statutory rape are illegal. Being gay isn't. That is the difference.
In 1986 the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of sodomy laws. In fact, until 1970 there were sodomy laws in almost every state in the union. It was illegal in 14 states until 2003 when the Supreme Court invalidated sodomy laws. The obvious point being that things can change in this arena quickly.
 
Last edited:

bamabelle1991

All-American
Jan 1, 2009
4,040
179
87
South Alabama
In 1986 the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of sodomy laws. In fact, until 1970 there were sodomy laws in almost every state in the union. It was illegal in 14 states until 2003 when the Supreme Court invalidated sodomy laws. The obvious point being that things can change in this arena quickly.
This is between 2 consenting, married adults, though. Sodomy, as defined in the Code of Alabama, is very much illegal if it meets the elements of the crime. The definition is also not always what most people consider sodomy to be.

Section 13A-6-63

Sodomy in the first degree.

(a) A person commits the crime of sodomy in the first degree if:
(1) He engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another person by forcible compulsion; or
(2) He engages in deviate sexual intercourse with a person who is incapable of consent by reason of being physically helpless or mentally incapacitated; or
(3) He, being 16 years old or older, engages in deviate sexual intercourse with a person who is less than 12 years old.
(b) Sodomy in the first degree is a Class A felony.


Section 13A-6-64

Sodomy in the second degree.

(a) A person commits the crime of sodomy in the second degree if:
(1) He, being 16 years old or older, engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another person less than 16 and more than 12 years old.
(2) He engages in deviate sexual intercourse with a person who is incapable of consent by reason of being mentally defective.
(b) Sodomy in the second degree is a Class B felony.

Definition:
(2) DEVIATE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE. Any act of sexual gratification between persons not married to each other involving the sex organs of one person and the mouth or anus of another.


So, yeah, I don't see them legalizing any sex act that puts children or people unable to consent at risk of harm. Now, polygamy between consenting adults--MAYBE. But pedophiles--absolutely NOT.
 

Gr8hope

All-American
Nov 10, 2010
3,408
1
60

Has SCOTUS Created a Way to Get Around the Estate Tax?

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog...ay_to_get_around_the_estate_tax_comments.html

This article opens a discussion on some of the ways the ruling can change things. I don't pretend to know the law but find it intriguing. If Americans can find a way around the tremendous tax burden placed on them by spendthrift tyrants, hooray for them.

"Friday's S.Ct. decision U.S. v. Schlein, which held that the Federal government cannot define who is a "spouse" for purposes of *its own taxation rule* when it comes to inheritances, but rather has to defer to the state of residence's definition of "marriage" and "spouse." In other words, States now control who gets federal tax breaks.Oops, not quite done yet: The S.Ct. went on in the Obergefell v. Hodges case to tell the States that they, *too* cannot define who is a "spouse" for "marriage" purposes, that it has to include not only same-sex couples, but those that have the four "essential tributes" of marriage such as personal choice, the union is important to the individuals involved, safeguards children and rearing, and social order.
In other words, neither the Fed nor the States can define what a "marriage" is.
So yes, a grandmother could probably marry her granddaughter under this definition of "marriage." And a father his son, a mother her daughter, a sister and her brother. Or all can gang-bang themselves one huge tax shelter."

On a smaller scale, someone also said these "marriages" would entitle beneficiaries to Social Security benefits.

Now if I can just find a billionaire without heirs to "marry" my family we're all set.
 

BamaInBham

All-American
Feb 14, 2007
4,465
2,110
187
This is between 2 consenting, married adults, though. Sodomy, as defined in the Code of Alabama, is very much illegal if it meets the elements of the crime. The definition is also not always what most people consider sodomy to be.

Section 13A-6-63

Sodomy in the first degree.

(a) A person commits the crime of sodomy in the first degree if:
(1) He engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another person by forcible compulsion; or
(2) He engages in deviate sexual intercourse with a person who is incapable of consent by reason of being physically helpless or mentally incapacitated; or
(3) He, being 16 years old or older, engages in deviate sexual intercourse with a person who is less than 12 years old.
(b) Sodomy in the first degree is a Class A felony.


Section 13A-6-64

Sodomy in the second degree.

(a) A person commits the crime of sodomy in the second degree if:
(1) He, being 16 years old or older, engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another person less than 16 and more than 12 years old.
(2) He engages in deviate sexual intercourse with a person who is incapable of consent by reason of being mentally defective.
(b) Sodomy in the second degree is a Class B felony.

Definition:
(2) DEVIATE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE. Any act of sexual gratification between persons not married to each other involving the sex organs of one person and the mouth or anus of another.


So, yeah, I don't see them legalizing any sex act that puts children or people unable to consent at risk of harm. Now, polygamy between consenting adults--MAYBE. But pedophiles--absolutely NOT.
I was just trying to make the broader point that views on what is considered unnatural and perverted can change quickly as the post demonstrated. There is already an intense move afoot to change child consent laws as well as others. I have no predictions but we have recent history that demonstrates that views can change dramatically and quickly. Not many would have thought in 1970, when Illinois was the only state in the union without sodomy laws or in 1986 when the SCOTUS upheld the constitutionality of sodomy laws, that by 2015 not only would sodomy laws be invalidated but homosexual marriage would be imposed on each state and most of the MSM and entertainment and sports worlds would be celebrating sodomy, with most of their media organs suppressing or expessing contempt for dissent ? Again, things can change quickly, they may not, but they can.
 

Jon

Hall of Fame
Feb 22, 2002
15,636
12,545
282
Atlanta 'Burbs
I was just trying to make the broader point that views on what is considered unnatural and perverted can change quickly as the post demonstrated. There is already an intense move afoot to change child consent laws as well as others. I have no predictions but we have recent history that demonstrates that views can change dramatically and quickly. Not many would have thought in 1970, when Illinois was the only state in the union without sodomy laws or in 1986 when the SCOTUS upheld the constitutionality of sodomy laws, that by 2015 not only would sodomy laws be invalidated but homosexual marriage would be imposed on each state and most of the MSM and entertainment and sports worlds would be celebrating sodomy, with most of their media organs suppressing or expessing contempt for dissent ? Again, things can change quickly, they may not, but they can.
celebrating sodomy? WTH are you talking about. The only people thinking about sexual acts in the context of any of this are the christian fundies? What is the obsession?
 

seebell

Hall of Fame
Mar 12, 2012
11,919
5,105
187
Gurley, Al
Which way to the sodomy celebration? Is it being televised.? I guess by sodomy he means same-sex sex. As in sodomites.
 

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
84,530
39,620
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
I was just trying to make the broader point that views on what is considered unnatural and perverted can change quickly as the post demonstrated. There is already an intense move afoot to change child consent laws as well as others. I have no predictions but we have recent history that demonstrates that views can change dramatically and quickly. Not many would have thought in 1970, when Illinois was the only state in the union without sodomy laws or in 1986 when the SCOTUS upheld the constitutionality of sodomy laws, that by 2015 not only would sodomy laws be invalidated but homosexual marriage would be imposed on each state and most of the MSM and entertainment and sports worlds would be celebrating sodomy, with most of their media organs suppressing or expessing contempt for dissent ? Again, things can change quickly, they may not, but they can.
You need to really read what Belle's saying. The laws on pedophilia have changed over the last 75 years or so. They've changed in the direction of being stricter. The age of consent has been raised (as it should be, IMO) and more acts have been defined as being a violation, child porn for example. The laws against incest were really based on Mendelian principles. Polygamy, who knows? Maybe. Pedophilia? Not a chance...
 

BamaInMo1

All-American
Oct 27, 2006
2,012
481
102
53
Cumming, GA
Thanks for this. It is the answer to a question that some of us attorneys down here have been wondering about!!


Except that incest, polygamy and statutory rape are illegal. Being gay isn't. That is the difference.
Remember this: Gay marriage USED to be illegal so with the way society is going it is not far fetched for other things to be made Legal with the stroke of a pen.
 

BamaInBham

All-American
Feb 14, 2007
4,465
2,110
187
You need to really read what Belle's saying. The laws on pedophilia have changed over the last 75 years or so. They've changed in the direction of being stricter. The age of consent has been raised (as it should be, IMO) and more acts have been defined as being a violation, child porn for example. The laws against incest were really based on Mendelian principles. Polygamy, who knows? Maybe. Pedophilia? Not a chance...
I think I understand her post, but my point is simply that what the courts consider sexual perversion today may not be the same tomorrow (30/50 years). In 1986 the court upheld the constitutionality of sodomy laws and sodomy was generally regarded with disgust, even Obama had to cover himself politically just 7 years ago regarding this issue, today 29 years after '86...(well you know)... The point is that things can change quickly and surprisingly. It may be child consent laws (hopefully not), it may be polygamy, it may be ??? As you know, child abuse is not the only form of perversion left, but as unlikely as it may seem to many today, it can not be ruled out either.
 

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
84,530
39,620
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
I think I understand her post, but my point is simply that what the courts consider sexual perversion today may not be the same tomorrow (30/50 years). In 1986 the court upheld the constitutionality of sodomy laws and sodomy was generally regarded with disgust, even Obama had to cover himself politically just 7 years ago regarding this issue, today 29 years after '86...(well you know)... The point is that things can change quickly and surprisingly. It may be child consent laws (hopefully not), it may be polygamy, it may be ??? As you know, child abuse is not the only form of perversion left, but as unlikely as it may seem to many today, it can not be ruled out either.
Since the legal trend for the last 100 years or so has been strongly against pedophilia, as I said, you should be able - logically - to put that one behind you. However, I can see you are set in concrete, so this is my last word on the matter...
 

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
84,530
39,620
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
Why is it sodomy and not Gomorrahy?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Maybe because the scriptures are so vague. the line "so we may know them" (happened only in Sodom). This quote can - or may not - have a fleshly connotation, when translated from the Hebrew. I think that's the reason that it didn't get pinned on Gomorrah or the other small town which was destroyed in the same natural disaster, meteor shower or whatever it was. The physical evidence is inconclusive about what exactly it was. It's interesting that there are many pillars of salt in the Dead Sea, so the Israelites probably were very familiar with what they looked like...
 

BamaInBham

All-American
Feb 14, 2007
4,465
2,110
187
Since the legal trend for the last 100 years or so has been strongly against pedophilia, as I said, you should be able - logically - to put that one behind you. However, I can see you are set in concrete, so this is my last word on the matter...
Set in concrete about what ? Certainly not that child consent laws will degrade, in fact, they could even improve, but maybe they won't, things can always reverse course. OTOH, I am certain that how the courts view sexual deviancy can change quickly and in surprising ways. We have witnessed it in recent history.
 

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
84,530
39,620
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
Set in concrete about what ? Certainly not that child consent laws will degrade, in fact, they could even improve, but maybe they won't, things can always reverse course. OTOH, I am certain that how the courts view sexual deviancy can change quickly and in surprising ways. We have witnessed it in recent history.
OK. One more remark. Being an attorney and having followed the trends in pedophilia for years, I'll let you worry about it. Now, I'm really out...
 

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.