Alabama Supreme Court halts all same-sex marriages

[BoomerD]

LOL, Republicans don't understand the Constitution that they keep rubbing into everyone's face.

It's just a gawd-damned piece of paper! ()

 

[K1052]

It's just a gawd-damned piece of paper! ()

And long too. I mean they can only make it thorough the first three words of the Declaration of Independence before their minds start to wander.

 

[BoomerD]

And long too. I mean they can only make it thorough the first three words of the Declaration of Independence before their minds start to wander.

So many werds...no pichers!

 

[piasabird]

I would rather have the option to vote judges out of office if the public has no confidence in them.

 

[piasabird]

The only federal legislation ever passed on marriage was DOMA and Federal tax legislation trying to use marriage as an excuse to tax people more or less. DOMA has all but been struck down by the supreme court, so there is no federal law about marriage.

There are plenty of laws that refer to a person's Marital Status but no real federal definition of marriage.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

I would rather have the option to vote judges out of office if the public has no confidence in them.

It's pretty hard to remain impartial if you're constantly pandering to whatever opinion is currently popular. How many judges would have been voted out for supporting integration in the 1960s? Is that preferable just because it's a better representation of current public opinion? Sometimes judges have to take unpopular stances in administering the law to prevent the oppression of a marginalized class. You can't do that with the threat of losing your job hanging over your head.

 

[cbrunny]

Fuck Alabama. The only good thing to ever come out of Alabama was Forrest Gump, and that's even just a fictional version!

 

[cbrunny]

Methinks it has something to do with Alabama SC judges being painfully aware that they face elections/re-elections every six years.

Would be absolutely wonderful if our judges in the USSC faced the same requirement.

oh man that's such a terrible idea, it's not even funny. elected judges are atrocious at the best of times.

 

[MovingTarget]

Hopefully some good can come out of this nonsense, like Roy Moore getting removed (again) and disbarred.

As a citizen of Alabama, I hope that you are right. All Roy Moore is doing is ensuring that our state is ridiculed for decades longer than it otherwise would have been for opposing it in the first place. Our state supreme court is on the wrong side of this, yet it insists on dragging us through the mud kicking and screaming.

Sadly, even if this did happen, he would probably just get reelected due to a combination of voter apathy, gerrymandering, and ineffective (read: nonexistent) opposition.

Please do not assume we are all like the troglodyte currently heading our supreme court. Plenty of us do have both feet squarely in the 21st century.

 

[MovingTarget]

LOL, Republicans don't understand the Constitution that they keep rubbing into everyone's face.

They understand it just fine. Its that they just don't care. They idolize the constitution when it suits them and conveniently ignore it when it doesn't.

Who is going to stop them down here? The GOP retains a supermajority in both legislative houses in addition to controlling every single statewide office, without exception. If Roy Moore or his cronies lose their positions over this, they will just be reelected. This isn't their first rodeo in that department, so to speak.

 

[DrDoug]

It's pretty hard to remain impartial if you're constantly pandering to whatever opinion is currently popular. How many judges would have been voted out for supporting integration in the 1960s? Is that preferable just because it's a better representation of current public opinion? Sometimes judges have to take unpopular stances in administering the law to prevent the oppression of a marginalized class. You can't do that with the threat of losing your job hanging over your head.

Keeping judges in check is the point of voting for them. No judge is going to last long if they don't do what the majority wants them to do. It also explains the more bassackwards parts of our country and why things never seem to change there. Judges should not be aiming for future votes in their decisions but that is exactly what judges like these do.

They don't do what is right by the law, instead they pander to their communities in order to remain in their positions.

 

[K1052]

They understand it just fine. Its that they just don't care. They idolize the constitution when it suits them and conveniently ignore it when it doesn't.

Who is going to stop them down here? The GOP retains a supermajority in both legislative houses in addition to controlling every single statewide office, without exception. If Roy Moore or his cronies lose their positions over this, they will just be reelected. This isn't their first rodeo in that department, so to speak.

It will go back through the Federal courts (who will require state probate judges to issue licenses while reaffirming Federal supremacy) and SCOTUS will decline to hear the case. The Alabama Supreme Court said they would abide by SCOTUS decision (and implicitly the lack thereof). Failing all that the Feds start arresting people for disobeying a federal court order.

 

[Bubbleawsome]

As a citizen of Alabama, I hope that you are right. All Roy Moore is doing is ensuring that our state is ridiculed for decades longer than it otherwise would have been for opposing it in the first place. Our state supreme court is on the wrong side of this, yet it insists on dragging us through the mud kicking and screaming.

Sadly, even if this did happen, he would probably just get reelected due to a combination of voter apathy, gerrymandering, and ineffective (read: nonexistent) opposition.

Please do not assume we are all like the troglodyte currently heading our supreme court. Plenty of us do have both feet squarely in the 21st century.

Thank you.
Really proud of this state. :|

 

[Meghan54]

They understand it just fine. Its that they just don't care. They idolize the constitution when it suits them and conveniently ignore it when it doesn't.

Who is going to stop them down here? The GOP retains a supermajority in both legislative houses in addition to controlling every single statewide office, without exception. If Roy Moore or his cronies lose their positions over this, they will just be reelected. This isn't their first rodeo in that department, so to speak.

It's not just Alabama, it's the entire southeast, i.e. the Repub. (conservative) base.

But it's happened before....."separate but equal", Jim Crow, Black Codes, over and over, the southern states seem to have pretty much landed on the wrong side of current society's thinking. Sucks to have a region so damned steadfast in trying to remain in the early 1800's.

 

[trenchfoot]

Not much, really. The occurrence of homosexuality in all of nature has remained flat for thousands of years.

what is your point?

"Natural Selection

Natural selection is Darwin’s most famous theory; it states that evolutionary change comes through the production of variation in each generation and differential survival of individuals with different combinations of these variable characters. Individuals with characteristics which increase their probability of survival will have more opportunities to reproduce and their offspring will also benefit from the heritable, advantageous character. So over time these variants will spread through the population."

Such being the case, how would Darwin, in his era, explain the propensity for homosexuality being a trait that is of "advantageous character".

And I asked that merely from a purely objective science-based point of view, devoid of any prejudice, malice or disrespect for our GLBT community.

 

[cabri]

Link

Stuck between the state's highest court and a series of federal rulings, many probate judges were at a loss early Wednesday. Mobile County, one of the state's largest, initially announced that they wouldn't issue licenses to anyone, straight or gay.

One way to protest - no marriages will be allowed until the problem is cleared up.

 

[MovingTarget]

Link



One way to protest - no marriages will be allowed until the problem is cleared up.

Most in Mobile county are simply driving across the bay to Baldwin county for licenses since Roy Moore's announcement yesterday. I can't help but feel a little bit of schadenfreude at conservative couples being turned away at probate court for this reason.

 

[Bubbleawsome]

Most in Mobile county are simply driving across the bay to Baldwin county for licenses since Roy Moore's announcement yesterday. I can't help but feel a little bit of schadenfreude at conservative couples being turned away at probate court for this reason.

Don't lie, you just wanted to use schadenfreude in a post.

 

[feralkid]

In practical terms, all Unions should be treated equal.

However, any Judge that tells the Feds to piss off wins points with me. It's a state's rights thing, you wouldn't understand.

Just like slavery was.

D:

 

[Jaskalas]

Just like slavery was.

D:

And anything legitimate they want, like healthcare in Massachusetts or oil in Alaska.

 

[zinfamous]

"Natural Selection

Natural selection is Darwin’s most famous theory; it states that evolutionary change comes through the production of variation in each generation and differential survival of individuals with different combinations of these variable characters. Individuals with characteristics which increase their probability of survival will have more opportunities to reproduce and their offspring will also benefit from the heritable, advantageous character. So over time these variants will spread through the population."

Such being the case, how would Darwin, in his era, explain the propensity for homosexuality being a trait that is of "advantageous character".

And I asked that merely from a purely objective science-based point of view, devoid of any prejudice, malice or disrespect for our GLBT community.

Well, being a "scientist" myself, working in "evolutionary genetics," I actually asked you form a "scientific" perspective--because your question is not, in any way a science-based point of view.

It really has no bearing on evolution from the singular perspective of your copy paste from wherever you copy-pasted.

Think about it--if Natural Selection describes the accumulation of traits across a sexually-reproducing population, what could it possibly have to say about something, that, in your mind, would not be part of that population?

Here is the other thing--we know that homosexuality and homosexual behavior occurs in nearly all observed natural populations at roughly 2% clip. So, generation after generation, it clearly has not been selected against, has it? Further, one can make an argument that the trait provides some benefit to the respective populations.

In humans, I think homosexual couples provide a great service in terms of adopting all of the unwanted children from red state conservative shit holes that force crackheads and rape victims to birth their infants into, well, a welfare system that the conservatives also do not want. So, you know, there's that.

Gays: cleaning up conservative social spunk since 1968.

 

[trenchfoot]

Well, being a "scientist" myself, working in "evolutionary genetics," I actually asked you form a "scientific" perspective--because your question is not, in any way a science-based point of view.

It really has no bearing on evolution from the singular perspective of your copy paste from wherever you copy-pasted.

Think about it--if Natural Selection describes the accumulation of traits across a sexually-reproducing population, what could it possibly have to say about something, that, in your mind, would not be part of that population?

Here is the other thing--we know that homosexuality and homosexual behavior occurs in nearly all observed natural populations at roughly 2% clip. So, generation after generation, it clearly has not been selected against, has it? Further, one can make an argument that the trait provides some benefit to the respective populations.

In humans, I think homosexual couples provide a great service in terms of adopting all of the unwanted children from red state conservative shit holes that force crackheads and rape victims to birth their infants into, well, a welfare system that the conservatives also do not want. So, you know, there's that.

Gays: cleaning up conservative social spunk since 1968.

Great post. It's cleared up much of where your perceptions are derived from. Allow me to explain my use of the phrase "science-based point of view". Being that I assumed Darwin was a "scientist" in what I thought was a generally accepted sense of the word, I referred to his research as being "science-based". If your interpretation of that phraseology was meant to correct a misconception of mine in that regard, then thanks, I stand corrected. :thumbsup:

My personal view on all of this controversy coming out of Alabama is that their SC justices are obviously wrong and doubly wrong because their opinions are egregiously politically motivated and blatantly disregards a basic tenet of our constitution.

 

[amicold]

It's Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve...

Country is going to hell. Ruled by a bunch of gosh damn pansies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTTWMcmPbZ8

 

[Scooby Doo]

It's Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve...

Country is going to hell. Ruled by a bunch of gosh damn pansies.

LOL "Eve" was Steve's drag name.... :awe:

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

"Natural Selection

Natural selection is Darwin’s most famous theory; it states that evolutionary change comes through the production of variation in each generation and differential survival of individuals with different combinations of these variable characters. Individuals with characteristics which increase their probability of survival will have more opportunities to reproduce and their offspring will also benefit from the heritable, advantageous character. So over time these variants will spread through the population."

Such being the case, how would Darwin, in his era, explain the propensity for homosexuality being a trait that is of "advantageous character".

And I asked that merely from a purely objective science-based point of view, devoid of any prejudice, malice or disrespect for our GLBT community.

Kin selection.