Gay marriage ban ruled unconstitutional in Virginia

[Hypermug]

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/lo...245473531.html

A federal judge ruled late Thursday evening Virginia's gay marriage ban is unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen's decision makes Virginia the second state in the South to have a ban on gay marriages overturned.

Wright stayed her decision until an appeals court rules, meaning that gay couples will not be able to marry in the state immediately.

Thursday, Wright ruled the ban violated the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment.

Norfolk, Va. residents Timothy Bostic and Tony London filed an initial complaint last year when their application for a marriage license was denied.

Chesterfield County, Va. residents Mary Townley and Carol Schall were added as plaintiffs to the case. The two were married in California in 2008, but their marriage was not recognized in the Commonwealth. Their claim centered around Schall's wish to adopt Townley's birth daughter, which she was unable to do under Commonwealth law. Court documents say the two women tried to renew their daughter's passport at a US Postal Office in Virginia, and were denied.

"You're nobody, you don't matter," the two were told by a clerk, according to court documents.

Court documents go on to describe the couple's uphill battle obtaining health insurance.

"Government interests in perpetuating traditions, shielding state matters from federal interference, and favoring one model of parenting over others must yield to this country's cherished protections that ensure the exercise of the private choices of the individual citizen regarding love and family," Wright wrote.

Virginians voted to constitutionally define marriage between a man and a woman in 2006. Recently-elected Attorney General Mark Herring announced earlier this year he would not uphold it, paving the way for hearings challenging the ban.

The decision comes the day after a similar ruling in Kentucky and following similar rulings in federal courts in Utah and Oklahoma.

Didn't expect this so soon. Good going Virginia!

[xparasite9]

hopefully "marriage" will soon stop being a government-recognized thing altogether, and we'll move to a civil union system across the board.
access to the privileges (oh, sorry. "right") afforded with this kind of legally binding contract shouldn't be restricted to a prerequisite as silly as "love".

Seriously how long until asexual civil unions pls

[SaptaZapta]

Seriously how long until asexual civil unions pls

The government has never cared about the sleeping arrangement of married couples (except in the case of immigrants suspected of marrying just for the Green Card).

[VerrKol]

The government has never cared about the sleeping arrangement of married couples (except in the case of immigrants suspected of marrying just for the Green Card).

Apparently you missed the articles about weird sex laws.

[SaptaZapta]

Apparently you missed the articles about weird sex laws.

Those forbid certain activities.
As far as I know, there are no laws requiring married couples to have sex.

[xparasite9]

The government has never cared about the sleeping arrangement of married couples (except in the case of immigrants suspected of marrying just for the Green Card).

Those forbid certain activities.
As far as I know, there are no laws requiring married couples to have sex.

Well, perhaps aromantic may have been a better choice of word.
The problem is that when one speaks of marriage, romantic love is heavily implied.

Why can't we have civil unions between consenting adults of any situation or number? Why does it have to be only two? Why can't it include siblings or nephews/nieces?

I'm seeing this as more of a culture war than a human rights campaign. Otherwise the focus would have been on phasing out government recognition of marriages, replaced with an updated policy on civil unions.