N.C. GOP lawmakers want Supreme Court reinstate same-sex marriage ban

North Carolina legislative leaders say they’ll ask the U.S. Supreme Court to quickly hear their appeal seeking to reverse lower-court rulings that legalized gay marriage in the state.

Senate leader Phil Berger and likely House Speaker Tim Moore said Thursday the two Republicans will ask the nation’s highest court to hear the North Carolina case before a lower appeals court in Richmond, Virginia.

Federal judges in Greensboro and Asheville ruled in October that the state constitution’s amendment banning gay marriage was unconstitutional.

The rulings came after the Supreme Court refused to hear a case that overturned Virginia’s similar ban.

Berger and former House Speaker Thom Tillis were allowed by the Greensboro federal judge to intervene. Attorney General Roy Cooper said all potential legal defenses are exhausted.

Greg Abbott Writes Completely Ridiculous Argument Against Marriage Equality

Sometimes I think conservative Republicans, especially those from Texas, couldn’t do anything else that would surprise me. After all, this is the state that gave us George W. Bush, Rick Perry, Ted Cruz, Louie Gohmert, and Steve Stockman. Remember Stockman and Gohmert, the two members of the House that make Michele Bachmann look like a sane, balanced human being in comparison?

Well now, I’m totally not shocked, but still surprised at the argument that current Texas Attorney General and Republican gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbott presented in his brief which was filed to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which hears cases from Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi.

It is worth noting that the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals is known for being very conservative, and some people (myself included) believe the eventual ruling from this court will conflict with other federal appeals courts, thereby forcing the Supreme Court to finally rule on the matter of marriage equality.

Anyhow, in this brief, Greg Abbott was supposed to explain why allowing same-sex marriage in Texas would somehow undermine heterosexual marriage. Well, he decided not to do that; instead, he rambled on about how heterosexual marriage was better:

Federal Judge Mocks State of Kentucky’s Opposition to Gay Marriage: Your ‘Arguments are Not Those of Serious People’

A few weeks ago there was an article detailing the battle in Kentucky concerning their ban on same-sex marriage. The state’s ridiculous “argument” was that same-sex marriage shouldn’t be legal because gay couples can’t procreate. They also tried to claim that this would somehow negatively impact the state’s economy.

No, seriously, that was their argument.

Well, this past Tuesday, Judge John G. Heyburn ruled the ban unconstitutional and had a few choice words for the state of Kentucky:

“These arguments are not those of serious people. Though it seems almost unnecessary to explain, here are the reasons why. Even assuming the state has a legitimate interest in promoting procreation, the Court fails to see, and Defendant never explains, how the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage has any effect whatsoever on procreation among heterosexual spouses. Excluding same-sex couples from marriage does not change the number of heterosexual couples who choose to get married, the number who choose to have children, or the number of children they have.”

He also went on to say, “The state’s attempts to connect the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage to its interest in economic stability and in ‘ensuring humanity’s continued existence’ are at best illogical and even bewildering.”

That response is nearly perfect. Though I wish he would have put something in there about procreation not being a requirement for marriage and that banning same-sex couples based on their inability to procreate would also have to include any heterosexuals who couldn’t have children.

You don’t have to be a judicial scholar to see how weak of an “argument” the state of Kentucky put up here. Because like I said, even if they were successful in winning this case, they would have then had to ban all heterosexual couples from marrying if they couldn’t have children for whatever reasons.

This fight against the legalization of same-sex marriage has just became pathetically sad. Even in strongly Republican states, judges are overturning these bans right and left because there’s absolutely no argument that can be made to deny homosexuals their right to marry without blatantly violating their Constitutional rights.

It’s like I’ve said several times before, the debate on same-sex marriage is over – we won. It’s no longer a matter of if same-sex marriage will be legal in the United States, but when.