http://ingodwetrustblog.com/judaeo-christian-values-under-attack/state-ags-file-brief-over-california-ruling/ Unifying America for Freedom's Cause Thu, 09 Feb 2012 06:40:09 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 http://ingodwetrustblog.com/judaeo-christian-values-under-attack/state-ags-file-brief-over-california-ruling/comment-page-1/#comment-5940 Jesse Sat, 31 May 2008 16:48:47 +0000 http://ingodwetrustblog.com/2008/05/31/state-ags-file-brief-over-california-ruling/#comment-5940 Roy, Good point about the heterosexual couples living together and not getting benefits. Totally right that they are making choices with known results. Roy, Good point about the heterosexual couples living together and not getting benefits. Totally right that they are making choices with known results.

]]> http://ingodwetrustblog.com/judaeo-christian-values-under-attack/state-ags-file-brief-over-california-ruling/comment-page-1/#comment-5938 Peter Sat, 31 May 2008 16:12:39 +0000 http://ingodwetrustblog.com/2008/05/31/state-ags-file-brief-over-california-ruling/#comment-5938 I fully agree with you on this one Roy. The other state's AGs should take a stand on this. What a mess we are going to have as this goes through the courts. It will be costly and divisive and could make the aggressive gay activists even angrier and that is a scary thought. I fully agree with you on this one Roy. The other state’s AGs should take a stand on this. What a mess we are going to have as this goes through the courts. It will be costly and divisive and could make the aggressive gay activists even angrier and that is a scary thought.

]]> http://ingodwetrustblog.com/judaeo-christian-values-under-attack/state-ags-file-brief-over-california-ruling/comment-page-1/#comment-5935 Roy Bischoff Sat, 31 May 2008 15:50:46 +0000 http://ingodwetrustblog.com/2008/05/31/state-ags-file-brief-over-california-ruling/#comment-5935 First off I think the other 39 attorneys general should be embarrassed that they did not take a stand on this issue. Since the Constitution says that states have to recognize the laws of other states this would cause the taxpayers many millions of dollars to litigate this issue. Many states will fight hard not to have to recognize these "marriages" (I just have to say that in the known history of the world marriage has always been between opposite sexes no matter what the CA justices think). I don't think it is discriminatory to provide other ways for homosexual couples to have the benefits provided to married couples. I think it is also okay to deny them these benefits especially if heterosexual couples that are living together but are not married do not receive them. Both types of couples make choices with known results: they don't have the benefits provided based on being married. I think that this case is a very important one. These ten AG's I think are hoping the CA voters will vote not to have same sex marriages and it solves a lot of problems. First off I think the other 39 attorneys general should be embarrassed that they did not take a stand on this issue. Since the Constitution says that states have to recognize the laws of other states this would cause the taxpayers many millions of dollars to litigate this issue. Many states will fight hard not to have to recognize these “marriages” (I just have to say that in the known history of the world marriage has always been between opposite sexes no matter what the CA justices think). I don’t think it is discriminatory to provide other ways for homosexual couples to have the benefits provided to married couples. I think it is also okay to deny them these benefits especially if heterosexual couples that are living together but are not married do not receive them. Both types of couples make choices with known results: they don’t have the benefits provided based on being married.
I think that this case is a very important one. These ten AG’s I think are hoping the CA voters will vote not to have same sex marriages and it solves a lot of problems.

]]>