Comments

  1. dattexas says

    What’s sad is that Robert C. Jones rejects honest, legal analysis to reach a decision based solely on his own personal biases and indoctrination. That’s not what we learned to do in law school. His opinion is hog wash. It will be reversed.

  2. Brad says

    Oh how nice. Another Christianist bigot decides through faulty, disproved logic, that since LGBT people can’t procreate (ignoring that they can) therefore should not be allowed to marry. Then, there should be a fertility test for every heterosexual couple that apply for a marriage license. Also, all of those past child-bearing age should be banned from getting married, because marriage is ONLY about procreating. After marriage every couple must procreate or risk invalidation of their marriage. Stupid. I didn’t go to law school, but even I can see how ridiculous this idiot’s decision is. He should be removed from the judges bench and disbarred for such stupidity.

  3. HadenoughBS says

    Surprise, surprise. It had to be a Mormon federal judge to make this ruling. So, onward marriage equality soldiers and march your appeal of this ridiculous ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court.

  4. says

    The procreation argument was also used successfully in Arizona. The Attorney General, a Democrat, used it expecting that it would not work. But the Supreme Court here agreed- just ridiculous.

  5. Caliban says

    Look on the bright side. If Romney had won this pr*ck probably would have ended up on the Supreme Court. My personal experience with Mormons is that once established they start hiring and promoting more of their own, whether they’re qualified or not. Talk about “anchor babies”! That’s what makes the mandatory tithe worth it.

  6. Francis says

    In a way, this is a good thing. Because this ruling is SO clearly and obviously biased, these arguments that have been made here to deny equality can be trashed accordingly and categorically on appeal.

    But now we know exactly what would have happened, as Caliban said, if Romney won election. People like this would be on the Supreme Court. And they would tangle themselves in a knot to justify discrimination against us.

  7. anon says

    I should think the more recent ruling by the ninth circuit would have precedent over this case, though it was a ruling supposedly limited to CA. In that ruling, the ninth held that Prop 8 violated equal protection under the law by denying a right previously granted to a minority group (CASC ruling that gays have a right to marry under the CA constitution prior to Prop 8) solely out of animus. In NV the right wasn’t taken away since it never existed in the first place, but one could rule that the amendment itself was enacted out of animus and knock it down without granting any further rights. That’s probably the best we can hope for under a review by the ninth during the appeals process.

  8. says

    I deliberately read the opinion without looking up Chief Judge Jones first — but it clearly read as one written by a Mormon. Not just LDS, but a former Bishop (like MIttens). Legalistically, he applies a “conceivable rational basis” test. The actual test is “REASONABLY conceivable BASIS IN FACT” (my emphasis). His speculation that straights won’t marry if lesbians and gays can is ludicrous and lacking any reasonable basis in fact. Last, but not least, his constant use of the word “homosexual” both as a noun and as a non-science adjective speaks volumes about his lack of contact with LGBTs (let alone his description of my sexual orientation as my “sexual preferences and practices.”) It has been a decade or more since anyone in authority called me a “homosexual person” or called my orientation a “preference.” Since he uses such archaic and condescending language in a published judicial opinion, one can only wonder if he refers to President Obama in private as a “mulatto.”

  9. cfox says

    Does anybody else think that this opinion is written directly to raise appealable questions of law? It looks to me like it is done on purpose–to place before the SCOTUS the issue of any and all discrimination against LGBT person as violative of Equal Protection, etc.

  10. Icebloo says

    Gays getting married would scare off straights from getting married ? WHAT ?!

    Once again I hope all you GRUBS (Gay Republicans) are taking notice – a REPUBLICAN appointed Judge by a REPUBLICAN President is taking away your rights !

    This idiot needs to be fired. He can’t just issue something as stupid as this without any PROOF that it would happen. This has to be illegal ?

  11. JJ says

    Mormons believe they will suffer eternal torture if they defy church teaching. And since they believe the alleged laws of God are above the laws of the people, they can’t be relied upon to apply the law when it conflicts with church doctrine. Not to mention the fact that you can’t expect someone to reach rational conclusions when he believes in invisible sky fairies and magic underwear. Mormons are positively incompetent to serve as judges and should be categorically barred from the bench.

  12. Tothepoint says

    So who the hell appointed this irrational, bigoted and lying jackass to a federal court. Bias should be this mthrfckr’s first, middle and last name. **swhipe.

  13. Robert says

    Mormons need to be banned from participating in all civic duties on the local, state and federal level since they are unable to put aside their insane religious beliefs.

  14. says

    So he wants to keep the status quo because gay people are not able to procreate and they are not a politically powerless class? Why are straight people allowed to marry in Nevada? Because heterophobia doesn’t scare gay people from entering the institution of marriage? This judge is, without a doubt, a moron. He might have had a point about not procreating if it weren’t a false claim. Gay people may not be able to naturally have children, but the science is here to allow any two people to have a biological child. Beside, by his logic, doesn’t he need to nullify all marriages between straight couples that cannot procreate, and possibly even the people that don’t want to?

  15. BETTY says

    “The perpetuation of the human race depends upon traditional procreation between men and women.”

    Hey buddy: humans aren’t going to stop popping out kids because gays can get married. Birth rates aren’t going to plummet. If anything, this will mean more loving, stable homes for kids to be adopted into. You know “the social backstop for when traditional biological families fail” as you put it. The ones that come from HETEROSEXUAL failures.

  16. Diogenes Arktos says

    I’m surprised no one else commented on the fact that he took as his basis a 1972 decision which decided ther was no “substatinal federal question” regarding marriage equality. If anything has been learned in the intervening years it is the number of federal benefits gay couples are denied.

    @CFox: If he did anything of value for the LGBT side, it was pure oversight on his part.
    @ToThePoint: W

  17. JAMES says

    I live in Las Vegas and I am ashamed that I did not know this fight for marriage equality was going on with all of these loving, committed couples. This took me by total surprise.

    What didn’t take me by surprise a Bush-appointed judge who is a Mormon ruling in favor of preventing same-sex marriage.

    What a disgusting ruling and a disgusting man. He’s absolutely insane too. Gay people can’t procreate? Yes, we know that. Neither can barren heterosexual couples. Should they be allowed to get married then? Same-sex marriage turning heterosexuals away from the institution? That doesn’t seem to be the case at all in states where same-sex marriage is legal or countries around the world where same-sex marriage is legal.

    This man came up with the lamest excuses to hide behind the fact that he’s letting his religion decide for him.

Leave A Reply