Idaho To Nullify Gay "Marriage"?

by JASmius



That's how it's looking - at least symbolically:

Same-sex "marriage" is now legal in all fifty States....

Actually, no, it's not, constitutionally speaking.  What the Assholiated Press meant to say is that it's been illegally forced on all fifty States.

....but nestled in the Idaho Constitution remains the provision that defines marriage as only between a man and a woman.

Which is the definition of marriage and has been ever since Creation Week itself.

The Supreme Court struck down all gay "marriage" bans nationwide last week....

Which it did and does not have the legal authority to do.

....making Idaho's constitutional marriage definition unenforceable.

A matter of power that the States are legally free to ignore, or nullify.  And that's the direction in which the Gem State is moving:

However, removing the language will likely be an uphill battle. Amending the Idaho Constitution first requires approval from the Republican-dominated Legislature. The proposal must then win a simple majority in a voter referendum - a tough task for even lesser politically-charged initiatives.

Idaho is one of thirty states that amended their constitutions to ban gay "marriage" that have not yet take steps to repeal their amendments, even though they have been rendered unenforceable by the Supreme Court’s gay-marriage decision.…

Unless the States nullify them, which they have every legal authority to do.

Idaho’s gay "marriage" ban has been enshrined in the state constitution since 2006 after winning 63% of the vote.

Let's correct that mischaracterization.  Sodomarriage has not and was never "banned"; it simply does not definitionally exist.  Marriage is between one man and one woman, as God ordained it.  Accordingly, there is, definitionally, no such thing as "gay marriage".  And what does not exist cannot be "banned".

Gay rights supporters argue removal is the natural next step to comply with the Supreme Court’s ruling. But Republican lawmakers and gay marriage opponents counter that there is no legal need to change the constitution.

“Idaho should not remove that language,” said Julie Lynde, executive director of Cornerstone Family Council. “There is no reason to obliterate traditional marriage. It’s a symbolic and historic piece of language.”

Despite the SCOTUS's attempt to obliterate it.  In short, "We will not comply" - the very essence and definition of nullification.

Furthermore, when Idaho lawmakers gather in Boise at the beginning of 2016, they’ll be kicking off the legislative session in an election year. Republican lawmakers will be less likely to cast a vote that could be used against them by an opponent.

Idaho is, in other words, a "red" State, and it will not meekly turn itself functionally "blue" just because five robed despots order them to do so.

I think the patriarch Joshua said it best:

If it is disagreeable in your sight to serve the LORD, choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.”