St. Louis Tests State Gay Marriage Ban

[FWS]

St. Louis tests state gay marriage ban



Recently married couples in St. Louis are pictured. | AP Photo

Officials say they knew that defying the state's marriage ban would trigger a showdown.

By NICHOLAS P. FANDOS
Politico.com
6/26/14

Missouri was the first state in the country to pass a constitutional ban on gay marriage 10 years ago, and it’s now the latest to see its ban come under fire amid rapidly changing public opinion.

The challenge came as officials in St. Louis, the state’s most prominent city, issued marriage licenses to four same-sex couples Wednesday evening, just hours after federal judges struck down similar same-sex marriage bans in Utah and Indiana as unconstitutional.

St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay said city officials knew going in that defying the marriage ban would probably trigger a court showdown, and he welcomes that.

“I felt that if we didn’t do these things, and we didn’t do this here in St. Louis, it wouldn’t be done anywhere else in the state of Missouri,” Slay said in an interview.

Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster wasted no time challenging the marriages, requesting a restraining order Thursday morning to block the city from issuing any additional licenses.

“Regardless of my personal support for marriage equality, such vital questions cannot be decided by local county officials acting in contravention of state law,” wrote Koster, a Democrat who many to expect to run for governor in 2016.

A circuit court judge denied the order Thursday in light of the city’s agreement to stop issuing licenses for the time being. He did not rule out granting an injunction in the future.

When Missouri passed its ban in 2004, it had the support of 71 percent of voters. The measure bars the state from validating or recognizing same-sex marriages.

But as national opinion has shifted and similar bans across the country have been struck down in recent years, The Show Me State has seen its own electorate evolve on the issue, albeit at a slower pace than much of the country.

Thirty-six percent of Missourians responding to a June 2012 poll said they supported legalizing gay marriage, a 4 percentage point increase from just a year before. By comparison, a Washington Post/ABC News poll taken this spring found that 59 percent of all Americans support legalization.

“There clearly has been a huge shift in terms of attitudes, nationally, internationally, and certainly in the state of Missouri,” said Slay, who is in his fourth term as mayor.

He added that St. Louis’ decision to issue the licenses was based on the belief, backed by legal counsel, that the ban is no longer constitutional given the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last June to grant gay couples federal legal standing.

Governor Jay Nixon, a Democrat, has said he would prefer to see the debate play out in another vote, in which case he would advocate for repeal. Nixon was Missouri attorney general when the ban was put into place.

In the meantime, he announced an executive order last November allowing same-sex couples married elsewhere to file joint state income tax returns. While that order is being challenged by conservative groups in court, the American Civil Liberties Union is trying to go a step further to gain complete recognition of out-of-state marriages.

A.J. Bockelman, who heads the statewide LGBT advocacy group PROMO, said the recent developments suggest it’s more effective for the pro-same-sex marriage community to turn to the courts to advance their cause.

“I think that, by and large, we are at a point where ballot initiatives aren’t really seen as viable any more, in part because you have seen so many court cases go in this direction,” Bockelman said.

To date, 19 states and the District of Columbia have legalized same-sex marriage.

[trappincoyotes39]

Not shocking at all, either St Louis or Kansas City would be the first to try such sure won't be a small town in MO that is for sure........

[FWS]

won't be a small town in MO that is for sure........

Well it was the small towns in MO that were a driving factor in passing the state ban, which are being found unconstitutional in a bunch of other states and MO's law will fall too.

When the smoke clears you'll notice that the Earth didn't open up and the state didn't fall in and wasn't consumed in eternal Hellfire and that those two lesbians getting married didn't affect you in the least bit.

They may even have a much lower divorce rate than Southern Baptists..........................

[trappincoyotes39]

Don't care really either way what comes of it all but all started by big cities not small town rural America, which has a right to their belief systems as well.

One thing I know same sex marriages will never take place in a Catholic Church or other Christian churches either. That is one area where freedom of religion still has the final say.

So what ever comes of it does, really no sweat to me people can live their lives as they see fit and small town rural Americans will do the same.

[FWS]

Don't care really either way what comes of it all

Which is where the public has been going for a while now..............

but all started by big cities not small town rural America,

I'm not sure that's accurate, not anymore anyways.

same sex marriages will never take place in a Catholic Church or other Christian churches either.

Well they already do in many Christian churches and even in some sects of Catholicism.

[trappincoyotes39]

So what Roman Catholic Church did you find that will perform a same sex marriage ? Doubt it highly.


Sure it is accurate depending on what state your talking small town rural America ..........

[FWS]

So what Roman Catholic Church did you find that will perform a same sex marriage ?

There are more sects of Catholicism than the Roman Catholic church.......

Sure it is accurate depending on what state your talking small town rural America ..........

Nah, it exists all over.

[trappincoyotes39]

FWS understand the sects of such what ones openly allow and perform same sex marriages today in the US?

[RShaw]

Legalize drugs. Condone same sex marriages. Allow corruption in our government. Yes sir, the morals of the American citizen continue to circle the drain.

[FWS]

Yes sir, the morals of the American citizen continue to circle the drain.

Especially those of the self professed "conservatives".....................

[trappincoyotes39]

FWS the beauty of America and the reason sides bicker and banter. So again what American sects of Christian belief are performing same sex marriages?

In fact the ones I nave found are mostly other country sects and not much in the US doing so and most are spin offs of main stream religions. The biggest majority will not perform such in the US while I agree some approve of them being members of the church but not performing the marriages. Some are ok with membership but will not allow them to hold an official position within the church either. In time some may change and then again over time many will not.

[bblwi]

There are not spinoffs that allow or preform these. There are whole denominations that allow same sex couples, marriages and even pastoral staff and bishops to be in active same sex relationships. Now that has caused strife and members leaving and even congregations but to name a few they would include Episcapalian, UUC, ELCA Lutheran etc.

Bryce

[trappincoyotes39]

Bryce they recognize them but are not official marriages in the eyes of the churches you listed for the most part

pew research list of church stances on the issue

www.pewforum.org/2012/12/07/religious-groups-official-positions-on-same-sex-marriage/

[bblwi]

As compared to a whole lot of churches that won't even recognize them that is a major leap for sure.

Bryce

[trappnman]

another example of hypocrisy- if churches are so for the sanctity of marriage, then they should shun divorced people from their ranks. and for Gods sake-how can they justify marrying someone that was married once, ignoring a marriage sanctified by God & promising to God to death do they part? It no longer exists? God fail to do his job?

and those so worried about it privately, should worry about the 60% divorce rate in this country

and perhaps the history of marriage should be looked at as well- marriage is about family rights, and property, legal status.

boggles my mind that rights come down to racist terms are a ok, but same sex marriage is the devils work

[trappincoyotes39]

Tman in the Roman Catholic Church your prior marriage must go before the tribunal and get the OK or your next marriage will not take place in a Catholic Church or be recognized as such either.

[bblwi]

What tribunal level are we referencing? There are 450,000 Roman Catholics within 60 miles of my house and many are into their 2nd and 3rd marriages. I am just curious at what level that tribunal is at for them to appeal to for the right to remarry and marry non Catholic spouses.

Bryce

[trappincoyotes39]

Bryce can't speak to your issue without more detail, so you have 450,000 divorced and remarried Catholics in your area? They have married non catholic people In a Catholic Church or elsewhere? big difference in the two for sure. Marriages can take place between a catholic and non but you need permission from the bishop to do so and they are called a mixed marriage and the non catholic must understand any children born will be raised catholic or otherwise no need to try and get married in a catholic chruch, same goes for baptism as well. Both parents do not need to be catholic but do need to be married .

I was married and divorced and my wife was as well in order for our marriage to be legal in the eyes of the church we had to submit information about our previous marriages and why they failed and then it went in front of the tribunal at the office of the diocese and made up of a board of people and it took about 3 months to get an answer back. I do know of some that have been denied as well. After that we received a written letter of explanation and then our marriage inside the church could go forward.

Now We could have followed the process which we did because of our beliefs or said screw it and went to another religion or forgot about it all together, because we are both catholic and believe in the church and the rules we took the steps needed to ensure out marriage was sanctified inside of the Catholic Church. That doesn't mean I agree with everything the church does, in fact not many do. The foundation of the religion though is the core .

[FWS]

Most modern Catholics reject church teachings on marriage, sex and contraception, Vatican admits

Nicole Winfield
Associated Press
June 26, 2014



Protesters hold up placards outside of St. Patrick's Cathedral in 2010 in New York City. The Catholic Church has been rocked by global sex abuse scandals.

The Vatican conceded Thursday most Roman Catholics reject its teachings on sex and contraception as intrusive and irrelevant, and officials pledged not to “close our eyes to anything” when it opens a two-year debate in October on some of the thorniest issues.

Core church doctrine on the nature of marriage, sexuality, abortion and divorce is not expected to change. But Pope Francis is well aware the church has lost much of its relevance and credibility in today’s secular world and is seeking to redirect priests to offer families, and even gays in civil unions, a “new language” that is welcoming and responsive to their needs.

Already, the working document for the synod discussions marks a sharp change from past practice. It is the result of a 39-point questionnaire that asked Catholics around the world about their understanding of, and adherence to, the church’s teaching on sexuality, homosexuality, contraception, marriage and divorce.

Thousands of ordinary people, clergy and academics responded. Usually, such working papers are compiled by bishops alone.

The responses were brutally honest.

The moral evaluation of the different methods of birth control is commonly perceived today as an intrusion in the intimate life of the couple

“A vast majority [stressed] the moral evaluation of the different methods of birth control is commonly perceived today as an intrusion in the intimate life of the couple and an encroachment on the autonomy of conscience,” the document said.

“Many responses recommend that for many Catholics the concept of ‘responsible parenthood’ encompasses the shared responsibility in conscience to choose the most appropriate method of birth control.”

Asked if the church might change its position to align itself with the practice of most of its faithful, Monsignor Bruno Forte, a meeting organizer, said, “We will not close our eyes to anything. These problems will be considered.”

Nonetheless, the document makes clear the value of the church’s core doctrine.

It laments the media and its own priests have failed to communicate the “positive” aspects of the Vatican’s key document banning artificial contraception, the 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae. Better pastoral outreach is needed, along with a “new language” to communicate the complete vision of marriage and family life the church espouses.

“Some observations inferred that the clergy sometimes feel so unsuited and ill-prepared to treat issues regarding sexuality, fertility and procreation that they often choose to remain silent,” the document said.

The officials presenting the report were asked what advice about sexuality, matrimony and raising children a group of celibate men could offer when they had chosen not to have sex, marry or have families.

Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, the synod’s organizer, said many lay Catholics were consulted in preparing the working document. There was also “ample representation” of the laity at Thursday’s press conference: a married couple celebrating their 25th anniversary joined the six clerics on the podium.

The document itself, though, acknowledged the church had a credibility problem.

“Responses from almost every part of the world frequently refer to the sexual scandals within the church [pedophilia in particular] and in general, to a negative experience with the clergy and other persons,” it said.

“Sex scandals significantly weaken the church’s moral credibility.”

The document does not recommend changing church teaching on hot-button issues like its opposition to gay marriage.

But citing Francis’ frequent call for the church to be more merciful and less judgmental, it recommends new pastoral guidelines to confront the increasing legal recognition for same-sex unions.

“The episcopal conferences amply demonstrate that they are trying to find a balance between the church’s teaching on the family and a respectful, non-judgmental attitude toward people living in such unions,” it said. It distinguished between gays who are “discreet” in their lifestyle and those who actively, “often aggressively” call attention to their unions.

The document also suggests ways to improve the cumbersome and expensive annulment process to enable Catholics who divorce and remarry to receive the sacraments. Currently, they are barred from receiving communion because the church deems they are living in sin and committing adultery.

[trappnman]

my first marriage was in Catholic Church to a non Catholic- the only thing we needed was the priests ok- and he gave that without question

Catholics have a cute way of nullifying previous marriages, which is what you are describing TC

a "lets pretend it never happened" kind of thing-

again- hypocritical- they want people in the pews, and $$$ in the plate