Category Archives: Marriage & Family

Christian singles and practical atheism

‘Schuette’: An impact on same-sex marriage?

Judge promises ruling soon on Idaho gay marriage

What do you do when you are on the wrong side of history?

Judge orders treatment for transgender prison inmate

Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum says NOM should not be allowed to intervene in Oregon case

Freedom to marry & dissent, rightly understood

Hearing continues for Ohio transgender inmate case

The beauty of family and marriage: #WeAreHere campaign, part 2

Idaho gay marriage suit headed to court

Church and academic leaders reveal divide among black Christians on homosexuality

Suit against NC marriage law has activists excited. Should they be?

Ohio’s marriage amendment under attack

NH House votes to study gay discrimination measure

Same-sex marriage backers debate whether traditional-marriage-only supporters should have a voice

Tennessee: same-sex marriage ruling put on hold, law “unsettled”

There’s more to love than “true love”

Retreating from marriage is not the answer to our economic problems

Arguments for same-sex marriage also apply to the “throuple”

Marriage is hard work, and deserves to be celebrated as well as examined

South Dakota next in line for same-sex “marriage” legislation

State district judge deems Texas’ restrictions on same-sex “marriage” unconstitutional

Would same-sex “marriage” legalization boost the economy?

Judge to hear Oregon marriage case, NOM planning to step in

South Dakota high school group considers allowing students to self-identify gender

Pro-marriage Illinois politicians replaced after opposing Pat Brady’s support for the redefinition of marriage

New York City councilman tells Chick-fil-A they are unwelcome in NYC

Texans who are against redefining marriage are now in the slight minority

For the first time, Georgia’s marriage laws will be challenged

    Shelton Stroman, 42, who manages a pet daycare center, and Chris Inniss, a 39-year-old veterinarian, are the lead plaintiffs. Two other couples, including two of Atlanta police officers, and a 34-year-old woman will also be listed as plaintiffs. Georgia has been one of five states in the country that doesn’t have same-sex marriage litigation pending. The lawsuit to be filed today will change that.


  • Posted: 04/22/2014
  • |
  • Category: Marriage & Family
  • |
  • Source: www.ajc.com

  • Tags: , ,

Disparate bedfellows: same-sex “marriage” and human rights

Judge: Indiana lacks valid reason for ban on out-of-state same-sex “marriages”

Wyoming governor affirms marriage is between one man, one woman

“Gay widower renews call for marriage-based green card”

Oregon same-sex “marriage” goes to court this week

Boy Scouts leave partnership when church insists on “gay” troop leader

Jennifer Rubin: “Anti-gay marriage sentiment fading”

Ignoring an inequality culprit: Single-parent families

CA Supreme Court proposes judges be prohibited from affiliation with Boy Scouts

No expected opposition to same-sex “marriage” arguments in Pennsylvania courts

Openly gay judge, Michael McShane, in spotlight overseeing Oregon case

Challenge to Arkansas marriage protection amendment heard

Olson and Boies cost Prop 8 opponents $6.4 million

Delaware to decide on charter school applications

10th Circuit panel that heard Utah’s arguments last week will hear Okla.’s same-sex “marriage” case

Milwaukee couple challenges Wisconsin’s marriage protection amendment

How the president got to “I do” on same-sex “marriage”

Wisconsin passes law to curb private custody transfers of children

North Carolina AG asks judge to delay same-sex “marriage” case

Ohio school board debates teacher sexual orientation rule

Illegal surrogacy shouldn’t block adoption by same-sex spouse, NY court determines

Judge takes up Michigan ban on domestic partner benefits

“Pro-gay marriage Republican super PAC raises $2.75 million”

Lyle Denniston: Broader same-sex “marriage” ruling in Ohio

    Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSblog: “The four couples, who originally sought only to have both parents’ names entered on birth certificates for children (already born or on the way), later asked the judge to widen his ruling and strike down as written — that is, for all circumstances — the ban against recognizing existing marriages. Turning to that wider issue, Judge Black declared: ‘There can be no circumstance under which this discriminatory classification is constitutional, as it was intended to, and on its face does, stigmatize and disadvantage same-sex couples and their families, denying only to them protected rights to recognition of their marriages and violating the [Constitution's] guarantee of equal protection.’”


  • Posted: 04/15/2014
  • |
  • Category: Marriage & Family
  • |
  • Source: www.scotusblog.com

  • Tags: , , , , ,

Governor orders Illinois National Guard to recognize same-sex “marriages”

Revised same-sex “marriage” constitutional amendment language certified in Ohio

Marriage, parenthood, and public policy

Catholic school principal apologizes for comments about divorce, homosexuality made by guest speaker

Utah attorney general encourages traditional marriage supporters to “take the high road”

Nevada GOP drops platforms against abortion, same-sex “marriage”

Federal judge set to issue key Ohio marriage ruling

Florida House approves expansion of voucher program

Illinois House “kills effort to ban conversion therapy for gay kids”

Penn. legislator introduces legislation to allow divorce of out-of-state same-sex “marriages”

SCOTUSblog analysis of 10th Circuit hearing in Kitchen v. Herbert

Are Christians obsessed with sex?

Eugene Volokh: Why not get the state out of the marriage business?

    Eugene Volokh at The Volokh Conspiracy: “And while I’m not a thoroughgoing Burkean, I do think that one shouldn’t jettison central institutions of society unless there’s a really good reason for it. The legal recognition of marriage is one such institution. This doesn’t mean that it can’t be changed at all, but I think the case for such changes has to be quite strong, and the more radical the changes the stronger. Mere abstract reasoning and a desire for legal simplicity, I think, shouldn’t suffice; one needs a strong practical case for why the changes are very likely to do substantial good. And I don’t think that case has been made in favor of the replace-marriage-with-contracts proposal.”


  • Posted: 04/10/2014
  • |
  • Category: Marriage & Family
  • |
  • Source: www.washingtonpost.com

  • Tags: ,

Missouri court denies TRO to prevent same-sex couples’ joint tax filings

Utah asks appeals court to block judge’s orders in adoption cases