Historic Same Sex Marriage Trial About to Start

[ProgressiveAthe]

I see 2 solutions to this:

1.) Allow homosexuals to marry, but do not force religions against it to conduct ceremonies.

2.) Get government the fuck out of marriage entirely. No more marriage licenses, no more tax breaks, no more special rights to government programs, no more special hospital visitation rights or any of the other 1000+ legal incentives there are for getting married.

I'm fine with either one.

Actually if both of you make a decent wage (Around 70,000) then you pay more if you are married.

 

[sportage]

While I support gay marriage, using the courts to make it happen is the wrong approach. Doing so will ensure it becomes a long-term lightning rod culture war issue like abortion that is corrosive to the political process. Give it a couple years and the people will allow it to happen via democratic means, and will be a much more durable solution. While I know it will be discouraging for gays to wait for the country to come around, I think it will result in a better long-term result.

Never ever should anyone’s "rights" be up for some public vote.
The courts rule in favor on marriage rights almost every time BECAUSE they rule by the law of the land. The average voting public has not the intelligence to make such rulings via the ballot box. Hell... most straights still think all gays are hair dressers and want to molest their male child. Remember all the hype over the CA prop in the 1970's to ban and fire all gay teachers from public schools, so gay teachers would not have "access" to kids?

Thank God Jimmy Carter, running for president back then, always asked the CA people to vote against the prop, and the prop did fail. A lesson our current president should take from old Jimmy.

If racially based mixed marriage were put on a ballot, as is done with same sex marriage, mixed marriage would also be banned. I still notice the "looks" a mixed couple get when out together in public. You think black-white mixed marriage would still be legal if placed on the ballot in most states? Nada.

Freedom and civil rights (what we are talking about here) is for the courts to decide, NOT some easily misinformed mob rule in the voting booth. That is exactly why anti same sex marriage groups go into states and challenge same sex marriage laws. They know its a nasty dirty little loophole they have to use, where they can win by pumping in money and BS television ads.
A nice dirty little scam they have going, and the general public is no where smart enough to separate the truth from the lies.

That is why I believe fighting for same sex marriage rights state by state, is a waste of time. Courts rule correctly in favor of, while the voting public unreasonably knocks down the very fabric America was built on via the ballot box. Law of the land and constitutional guaranteed freedom for all is business for the court, who have the ability to apply law.
But until a federal challenge is brought and won, states will keep perverting the process of civil rights by allowing the public to vote against the courts, and the laws they interpret. After all, courts applying the law is the America foundation, the core of our existence. That is what makes us different from some third world country. That is what all wars we have fought have been to protect.

 

[Craig234]

Sportage, you had me until the last sentence. Unfortunately, not one war has been fought for that.

 

[Avvocato Effetti]

When individuals of the same gender engage in sex, it is sin.

 

[Ozoned]

When individuals of the same gender engage in sex, it is sin.

And?

 

[classy]

Its not going to get overturned. Its done. The rule of law was followed and the when they challenged the law, the court ruled then because the correct procedures had been followed the only way to change it was to follow the same rules that enacted the law in the first place.

 

[Avvocato Effetti]

And?

Just because.

 

[LumbergTech]

When individuals of the same gender engage in sex, it is sin.

Obvious troll is obvious.

 

[MJinZ]

When individuals of the same gender engage in sex, it is sin.

Isn't everything a sin?

 

[Avvocato Effetti]

Obvious troll is obvious.

Fuck you.

Isn't everything a sin?

No.

 

[Zebo]

Obvious troll is obvious.

How is that a troll? The Desert Mystic Jesus (or one of them) says so and if someone believes that who are you to deny his beliefs so long as it doesnt infringe on your rights?

 

[Avvocato Effetti]

How is that a troll? The Desert Mystic Jesus (or one of them) says so and if someone believes that who are you to deny his beliefs so long as it doesnt infringe on your rights?

Welcome brother.

 

[Craig234]

When individuals of the same gender engage in sex, it is sin.

1. Does the bible say two people of who do this should be executed?

2. Do you follow the bible on this, if it does, and support execution for all gay sex acts?

3. If you find any 'exception' as an excuse for why you don't need to support it, why not for gay marriage?

4. Why do you think you can pick and choose some bible rules to follow and others to change or ignore?

5. You are for the LAW following your opinion of the bible on gay marriage and banning. But on divorce which the bible is clearly saying is not allowed, you are NOT supporting the law following that, you 'hate' it.

How about you 'hate' gay marriage and make it legal, like you do divorce?

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

When individuals of the same gender engage in sex, it is sin.

No, it isn't.

 

[Greenman]

Does anyone think the 9th circus court won't come down on the side of gay marriage? It's a slam dunk. The decision is already made, they just have to go through the formality of hearing the evidence.

 

[Vic]

Govt should not be in the marriage business. That is all.

 

[Vic]

No.

"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."

 

[Patranus]

Govt should not be in the marriage business. That is all.

But then the courts couldn't award vaginamony.
That would somehow be discriminatory towards women...a group that makes up a much larger percentage of the population.

 

[LunarRay]

The controlling case as far as I can tell is Baker v Nelson. In that case the SCOTUS said there was no Federal Issue. The 9th must follow that. I'm not sure how a District Court judge can even hear a State Case, if that is the case you speak to in the OP.
I think the Federal Marriage Law.. what ever it is called could get to the SCOTUS but not a State Constitution one regarding marriage.
I know there are heavy weights arguing the case so it will be heard but, I just don't see the Federal Issue if SCOTUS said it is not.
Ah... well... been too long for me since I knew stuff.. so I'll wait and see.

That aside, I strongly feel we are each 'blessed' with rights... among them is the right to get 'married'. Who we choose ought to be our choice, it seems to me. To deny that to anyone denies it to everyone...

 

[EagleKeeper]

When individuals of the same gender engage in sex, it is sin.

Sin is a religious concept driven by fear

 

[EagleKeeper]

The controlling case as far as I can tell is Baker v Nelson. In that case the SCOTUS said there was no Federal Issue. The 9th must follow that. I'm not sure how a District Court judge can even hear a State Case, if that is the case you speak to in the OP.
I think the Federal Marriage Law.. what ever it is called could get to the SCOTUS but not a State Constitution one regarding marriage.
I know there are heavy weights arguing the case so it will be heard but, I just don't see the Federal Issue if SCOTUS said it is not.
Ah... well... been too long for me since I knew stuff.. so I'll wait and see.

That aside, I strongly feel we are each 'blessed' with rights... among them is the right to get 'married'. Who we choose ought to be our choice, it seems to me. To deny that to anyone denies it to everyone...

Federal issue could be the denial of civil rights - equality under the law.

 

[MotF Bane]

When individuals of the same gender engage in sex, it is sin.

Unless you have two females, then it is win? :awe:

 

[Robor]

Unless you have two females, then it is win? :awe:

:thumbsup: :awe: :thumbsup:

 

[manlymatt83]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't gay marriage a done deal? Would there be any reason at all the supreme court would strike down gay marriage?

 

[theeedude]

Govt should not be in the marriage business. That is all.

Exactly. If you are dumb enough to sign a contract to give away half your earnings, then just write it up and sign it. No need to have the state bundle it with marriage. You can give it away to a man, woman, or a goat for all I care.