Thursday, June 20, 2013
Judge denies bid to block start of civil unions Sunday
POSTED: 04:44 p.m. HST, Dec 30, 2011
LAST UPDATED: 05:02 p.m. HST, Dec 30, 2011
U.S. District Judge Michael Seabright denied this afternoon a request by two churches for a restraining order to block a law that goes into effect Sunday permitting same-sex couples to enter civil unions.
Joshua Wisch, spokesman for the attorney general's office, said as a result of the ruling, the civil unions law will "go into effect as planned on Jan. 1, 2012."
The Emmanuel Temple and the Lighthouse Outreach Center Assembly of God asked for the order.
They argued that although they will be exempt from performing same-sex civil unions, they would face civil penalties and fines if they refused to rent their property for same-sex civil unions.
In a 17-page opinion, Seabright ruled that the churches have not shown they are entitled to the restraining order.
He said "it is clear that the present dispute is not ripe for the granting of a TRO."
Suit filed to prevent civil unions is thrown out
Churches' civil unions suit dismissed in federal court
Federal lawsuit targets isle civil unions
Churches revisit suit over civil union rites
I would hope everyone would wish ANY couple congratulations on such a happy occasion.
The lawsuit was a legal joke. If some churches are ever sued because they deny same sex couples the right to use their facilities for a solemnization ceremony, that would be the time to determine if they have the right to plead for a religious exemption. The attorney who filed this case HAD to know in advance that's how the court would rule.
I had assumed it would have been James Hochberg who filed the challenge, but I just checked and it was another attorney I am unfamiliar with. Shucks! I was hoping it was Hochberg, as such a challenge would demonstrate a weak understanding of the law. Darn! jom is apparently too smart to have filed such a frivolous suit.
If, when a conservative church IS sued for denying use of their facilities, I expect it would be Hochberg defending the churches. I understand the demand for a religious exemption. I am unsure whether I support it or not. To me, that's a tough call.
I am more than a little put off bythis Christian church calling itself "Emmanuel Temple." That strikes me as a deliberate, and presumptuous, attempt to infringe on the name of Temple Emmanuel, the Jewish synagogue. It is as if they think they can take the name for themselves because their claim, as Christian, trumps that of another, "false" religious group. Not the first time Christians display an arrogant disregard for the faith of others.
‘Soul Sessions’ feat. Taimane
