By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
The inertia against state prohibition of gay marriage continues to rise. United States District Court Judge Barbara Crabb declared Wisconsin’s same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional.
In 2006 Wisconsin voters amended the state constitution outlawing gay marriage in any form. The ACLU filed the lawsuit in February on behalf of eight couples who believe their constitutional rights to due process were violated consequently depriving them of protections married couples enjoy due to their gender.
Court clerks in Madison and Milwaukee immediately afterward opened their doors to register marriage licenses to gay couples beginning at 5:00 PM on the sixth, just over an hour after the court issued its ruling. Many couples welcomed this opportunity immediately, due in part to a belief among some that this might be a limited window of opportunity before a possible halt to the marriages during an appeals process.
Judge Crabb stated in her decision:
This case is not about whether marriages between same-sex couples are consistent or inconsistent with the teachings of a particular religion, whether such marriages are moral or immoral or whether they are something that should be encouraged or discouraged. It is not even about whether the plaintiffs in this case are as capable as opposite-sex couples of maintaining a committed and loving relationship or raising a family together.
Quite simply, this case is about liberty and equality, the two cornerstones of the rights protected by the United States Constitution.
Wisconsin Attorney General J. B. Van Hollen sought an emergency order in federal court to block the weddings, saying the ruling did not necessarily provide a clear path to gay weddings to begin. Van Hollen said confusion and uncertainty had resulted from the judge’s decision and the status quo must be preserved.
~ + ~
By Darren Smith
Source: Fox News
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
RE:
davidm2575, June 7, 2014 at 9:27 am
swarthmoremom wrote: “Many people have changed their minds about gay marriage since 2006 even the president.”
How comforting it is to know that the civil concept of the nuclear family is being destroyed by a fad.
***** *****
My wife and I were married in 1975, and have been married ever since.
So, the fad that holds that, because I am transgendered and therefore not honestly or truthfully labeled as “one man,” the nuclear family of my wife, our living biological adult child, and me, is to be destroyed by the fad that holds that gender is, and is only, purely binary?
And the fad that holds autism to be worse than cancer, because cancer is a terminal disease and autism does not always kill autistic people in utero, makes cancer preferable to autism?
Perhaps excerpts from two books may help those whose life traumas lead to rejecting the actual biological diversity that made human life possible and that allows humans to be alive will illumine, for those not so blinded by prejudice as to be outside the pale of rigorously truthful honesty”
The following three excerpted quotations are from University of Massachusetts-Amherst psychology professor, Robert Feldman, “The Liar in Your Life,” Twelve, Hachette Book Group, New York, 2009, and are used with written permission from the publisher.
Quotation #1, from page 258: “There’s a dirty secret I’ve been trying to avoid emphasizing in this book, but its about time we faced it. All of us are liars. Yes, that means you. And yes, it means me, too.”
Quotation #2, from page 73: “Parents of children with autism often report that their children are simply incapable of lying. While at first glance unrelenting honesty might be seen as a virtue, in fact it is at the heart of the social difficulties children with autism experience.”
Quotation #3, also from page 73: “Consider the irony of the situation. Honesty in children with autism is viewed as a manifestation of their disorder. Subsequently, autistic children who were originally unfailingly honest but have begun to show signs of lying effectively are considered to be showing improvement in their condition.”
******
The following excerpt is from neurologist Robert C. Scaer, M.D., P.C., “The Trauma Spectrum,” W.W. Norton, New York – London, 2005, page 58, and is used with written permission from the publisher:
Trauma As Imprisonment of the Mind
In Chapter 1, I defined the mind as “a perceptual experience, generated by a complex set of synapses, neurons, and neurochemical states, determined by genes, instincts, and experience, that is capable of developing and directing novel behavior.” In the brain of the trauma victim, the synapses, neurons, and neurochemicals have been substantially altered by the effects of a unique life experience. Not surprisingly, the perceptual experience that constitutes the mind has been equally altered. This alteration more than anything else is a corruption of procedural memory, that part of our intrinsic memory that is most involved in acquisition of survival skills. We depend on learned cues in our environment to distinguish positive versus negative survival-based information. If we have not learned to distinguish between these types of cues, we lose our edge in the survival game. In trauma, cues to an event that is over and done with are stored in procedural memory as if the event had never been completed.
Trauma thus represents a time-based corruption of learning. The brain in trauma has lost its ability to distinguish past from present, and as a result it cannot adapt to the future. This confusion of time further immobilizes the trauma victim, who still remains immobilized by a thwarted freeze discharge. Procedural memory is bombarded by environmental and internal cues that represent old, unresolved threat. Declarative memory is assaulted by intrusive thoughts, memories, and dreams that repetitively warn the person of potential danger. Furthermore, the constant activation of brain circuitry related to threat alters and suppresses structure and function in the verbal and thinking brain. Trauma indeed is a state of imprisonment.
In my life and in my life work, I find that the functional anthesis of imprisonment of the mind is autism.
Please note that I am using the word, “autism” in the sense in which Eugen Bleuler, as I understand his work, used it. Autism, in my understanding of Bleuler’s sense of autism, is a condition in which the self is an object of intense, unfailing, lifelong study, such that sufficiently accurate self-understanding is both necessary and sufficient for being true to self, and being true to self is both necessary and sufficient for being true to others.
Alas, imprisonment of the mind in and by psychological defenses which distort directly-observable tangibly-objective existential reality is the state of mind and the process of mind which deny to the traumatized person whose trauma is retained in psychological defenses the ability to be true to self, and denial of the practicable ability to be true to self precludes being true to anyone else. Hence, the vicious cycles of prejudice, retaliation, stigma, hatred, abuse, and prejudice stemming from abuse that has entrained humanity in a dance of deceptive self-destruction projected on others as though it might persist ad infinitum.
Methinks that unfailing honesty is the only truly viable remedy for prejudice and its progeny.
J Brian Harris – these days, thanks to the gay agenda, a wife might be biologically a male or female. Can you define your sex and the sex of your wife? Was your wife born biologically female and you biologically male?
Your avatar shows a bearded face that looks like a man. Is that you today? I’m confused because it sounds like you were saying that you were born biologically male and are now living as a female, but your avatar suggests you are living as a male. I hope you can clarify about your gender for us.
Schulte: Hah! Pick it up tomorrow.
Schulte: He didn’t say could, may, or might. He said it does. You might actually try reading what’s in your posts. Why should we be the only ones to suffer.
Actually, you two remind me of the exchange I had with Karen this morning. On another thread, she agonizes over how “the rich are being taxed into oblivion”. When I called her on that, she denied ever claiming that the rich were going to become extinct. Then she said that they were no longer going to be in existence. Round and round she goes, where she stops…. You know what else is no longer in existence? Dinosaurs and dodo birds. Because they’re extinct. I suppose I just made an ad hominem attack now, right?
Gimme a break. Reading meaning into your posts or just reading the meaning in your posts. Can you even tell the difference?
RTC – HO HUM
RTC wrote: “Actually, you two remind me of the exchange I had with Karen this morning. On another thread, she agonizes over how “the rich are being taxed into oblivion”.”
RTC, you misread Karen too. It was painful for me to read that thread, with you misreading and misrepresenting her, and still you have no clue. I’m starting to think you have a problem with verbs, or maybe you just read errant motives into what people write.
Thank you Paul for your comment. Sometimes people like RTC make me feel like I must be the worst writer in the world. Communication is hard, and I really do have to work hard at it.
Chief Warrant Officer Jim Wright (USN, Ret.) provides a link whereby he takes complaints. Under consideration of course. 🙄
http://www.stonekettle.com/
RTC – this is why I do not like using Wikipedia. It is too easy to edit and there are editing wars going on over various hot button topics.
David:
I think this entire comment is hysterically funny.
David: “You seem to be as out of touch with the sentiments of society as President Obama is when he unilaterally traded five terrorist generals for Sergeant Bergdahl.”
I know that not every comment can have style or wit, or even be incisive, but this is beneath you, in the sense that it isn’t up to your standards.
But it does say something about you that the majority of Americans are generally in favor of Bergdahl’s return; most of them, and I count myself among them, were basically unaware of his capture and imprisonment. (Shame on us.)
I do have a problem with Obama disobeying the law, although he’s on firmer ground here as commander in chief and the precedents set by Lincoln, but that’s a discussion for another day.
Another bit of telling insight is that you conveniently overlook the fact that several Republican senators had been fervently calling for this young man’s release, and then promptly turned around and began criticizing it. That’s flagrant hypocrisy, and you love that kind of theater.
Sorry, did you think that was ad hominem?
RTC,
You might want to stock up on Sharpies.
http://www.stonekettle.com/2012/09/unreasonable-people.html.
Chuck – I like a blogger who advocates violence by Sharpie. Didn’t I notice you were going out to get more today. However, do you think a person in your position should be recommending a site that advocates violence?
David dissembles:
“I never called for an insurrection. Talk about ad hominem attacks! I’m just telling you what I see happening in our society. You seem to be as out of touch with the sentiments of society as President Obama is when he unilaterally traded five terrorist generals for Sergeant Bergdahl.”
Your original quote….
Your original quote, call it a statement, a declaration, or a warning -whatever – it was an invitation to an ad hominem attack. Asserting that you were calling for an insurrection was not an ad hominem attack, and you can repeat it all you want. You’ll only be demonstrating that you don’t understand what an ad hominem attack is. That seems to be the trend among your fellows anytime you’re called out on something. BTW, you sound extremely emotional about this topic.
Frankly, the majority of Americans are in favor of same-sex marriage, especially among young people, where a greater majority are in favor than society overall. And honestly, since you seem so worked up about it, I have to wonder if maybe you might not want to start a rebellion.
RTC – you read into David’s post something that is not there. He did not advocate insurrection, he said that it was the sort of thing that could lead to insurrection. You have done this with my material, reading something into it which is not there.
Becoming more equal every day… YEA!
Marriage was created to bond, protect and perpetuate the family; to protect the bond of the parents and to protect the children from harm. Marriage does not exist, solely, for emotional purposes. Since homosexuals are incapable of conceiving and giving birth to children, they have no need for marriage. Homosexuality does not produce progeny. Homosexuality is terminal.
While there may be the frivolous affectation of artificial familial status in homosexual relationships, there is no compelling rational to equate them with heterosexual marriages that protect the family and perpetuate the species.
Homosexuals may consult an attorney to establish a legal, contractual relationship and employers may provide benefits based on those contractual relationships but homosexuals have no basis for marriage and their complaint is frivolous. Law does not exist for redress of grievances that are frivolous and whimsical. The perpetuation of the species and other matters of import do not rely on the activities of homosexuals or their normalization.
I live in the SF for lesbians, Madison, Wi. The university is a lesbian magnet school.
She was a lesbian who loved women. I do better w/ that demographic than just about any other. The lesbians who hate men, I cross the street to avoid them!
I believe they use the stainless steel. I worked w/ a woman who had 2 children via the baster. I seem to remember her saying the stainless steel ones were preferable because you could sterilize them. She never asked for my sperm. Maybe it’s because of the atrophied hand growing out of my forehead.
De gustibus non est disputandum
Ne aviditate cibos.
Nick,
“Turkey basters only cost $3.99.”
And would this be the stainless steel ones, or the ones you played with as a child?
Paul Ruben – I should the price of the baster would depend on how much you cared about your partner. 😉
David sez: “…most [lesbians] I know have sex the old fashioned way to produce children.”
**********************************
And exactly how many would that be, David? Could you share the number of the lesbians you know personally who have done so? Why should a lesbian want to have sex that she finds distasteful or even revolting, when she can obtain a solution to her problem for only $1.97?
Help the Vortex of Doom has eaten two comments, I only need one of them back.
Turkey basters only cost $3.99.