Alabama Lawmakers Find New Way To Ban Gay Marriage Even If Supreme Court Rules In Favor

[Fearless]

Late Monday afternoon the Alabama Senate passed a bill that would abolish the issuance of marriage licenses altogether from the state. Instead of issuing marriage licenses, couples would have to file a contract with the state that says they are legally authorized to be married.

The catch? Alabama law does not allow same-sex couples to be married, but as attorney Jake Watson tells WHNT News, this new approach might be legal since Alabama could argue it merely is regulating the types of contracts it recognizes and authorizes. Watson says this could end up at the Supreme Court, even if the justices later this month rule in favor of same-sex marriage.

Alabama Senators seem only too happy to get out of the marriage business to "save" marriage – for different-sex couples.

http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/davidbadash/alabama_lawmakers_find_new_way_to_ban_gay_marriage_even_if_supreme_court_rules_in_favor

--------------------------------

Like two year olds, they only want something because someone else might enjoy it.

[Politicalboi]

1. So are all out of state marriages no good?

I really wish some of these red states would secede so all the crazy ass people could all live there.

[Faux pas]

3. My thoughts (and DREAMS)

exactly Politicalboi!

[dixiegrrrrl]

6. All of my Dem. gay brothers and sisters here in Ala. do not share your broad brush thinking.

Come to think of it, all the straight Dem. citizens of Ala. do not either.

[underpants]

2. Welcome to Al Abama

Please enjoy your stay

[RKP5637]

4. There is really something fundamentally wrong with individuals that propose this

bullshit. It would be extremely interesting to see a psychological workup on them. There is definitely some bizarre baggage floating around in their heads.

[dixiegrrrrl]

8. Fundamentalism can really twist one's mind.

This is a last ditch effort to look good to the voters, before SCOTUS rules on the issue in a few weeks.
The state politicians can then go fund drive telling their backers how much they tried to remain bigoted.

[RKP5637]

11. It all gets pretty pathetic, doesn't it.

[LostOne4Ever]

5. In the not too distant future

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]All of these people, and I use the word "people" reluctantly, will have their children look back on them with nothing but contempt and shame.

And they will deserve every iota of that contempt and shame they get. Because they are not content just to be bigots, but they are going out of their way to hurt people who never did a single thing to them.

I take it back, they are not people....they are monsters.[/font]

[unblock]

7. roughly the equivalent of saying it's not a lie because if had my fingers crossed behind my back.

two year olds, indeed.

if this doesn't work, they'll issue "narriage" licenses and say, hah! the court struck said we couldn't discriminate against gays in "marriage" licenses, but they didn't say anything about "narriage" licenses! neener-neener!

[Jester Messiah]

9. It's a shame they can't apply their cunning to something useful. [nt]

[gopiscrap]

10. That would be a law circumventing the will of the Court

don't think it will fly.