Supreme Court Rejects Gay Marriage Appeals From 5 States

The president cannot simply declare a protected class. That's simply applicable to federal employees. It's tantamount to a CEO declaring that homosexuals are a protected class as long as his employees are concerned.

That doesn't make them a protected class lol

- - - Updated - - -

The crying from the left when the Supreme court declares that the States are allowed to decide is going to be (*)(*)(*)(*)ing epic.

 

Your name may be TheImmortal, but archaic and discriminatory same-sex marriage bans will be dead by the end of the decade.

 

Lol- I love watching you spin. It's so fun lol. You might want to read the article.

The only one crying will be you. But even then, you'll keep dreaming for the day when no gay people exist. Not gonna happen.

- - - Updated - - -

Probably in the next two years.

 

I disagree with your analysis. If it is known that Kennedy is not on the side of pro SSM, then the 4 conservatives would have voted to hear the case. All you need is 4 to hear it, and it would be a done deal. So I don't think you can say anything about what side Kennedy is on from this decision. It would make just as much sense to say he was on the side of SSM.

Justice Ginsburg noted that with the circuit courts in agreement, there is "no rush" to hear the cases, which makes sense. If none of the circuit courts are in conflict, why step in? The only reason to step in would be to overturn the decisions.

It makes more sense that the conservatives all voted not to hear it because they knew they would lose. Ginsburg voted no because she does not feel there is really a need to--plus it makes same-sex marriage legal in even more states right away, something she most likely agrees with as do the other liberal justices.

I think pretty much everyone on the court agreed not to hear the case, for mixed reasons. Conservatives thought they would lose, and wanted to put off the inevitable in hopes of persuading justices to be against it. Liberals wanted to wait for public opinion to continue increasing in support for same-sex marriage so they don't end up with a Roe v. Wade backlash. The fact that all circuit courts struck bans down already, and dismissing the cases would legalize SSM in 11 more states, probably motivated liberal justices to do just that as well.

 

The old biddies are getting the heebie jeebies as Supreme Court justices’ allow the federal circuit courts, all of whom have agreed that state bans are unconstitutional, to insure progress.

Somewhere in America today, there is a secure child in a stable family whose parents happen to be the same gender, who will continue to have health care coverage up to age 26 if he has not become eligible for federally-subsidized employer-administered coverage, and that makes some very, very angry.

He'll have the United States Constitution and RomneyCare, the model for the nation's plan, to thank.

(Okay, Willard's radically differed in that the kid would only be covered to age 25.)




.

Still, what a country!

 

No actually all of the federal courts have not agreed.

 

It's irrelevant. Gay marriage is inevitable nation-wide.

 

You're going to be incredibly disappointed.

 

Yea, I've been real disappointed thus far

This country is not as right wing as it used to be. You can thank the internet for that.

 

Rrrriiiggghhttt. Let us know how that goes.

 

I'm just going to say this in response to you TheImmortal,

The Supreme Court knew that by refusing to hear the appeals from the five states, they would be legalising SSM in 11 states. Neither side wants to give the right to marry to people to then have to take it away, so it follows that if the conservative anti-marriage side of the court knew they had a majority to uphold the bans, as you say, they would have almost certainly wanted to have taken up the case now in order to prevent marriages from taking place that they know they'll have to overturn at some point. It would make no sense not to hear it if there was a majority in favour of the bans.

I think there's a majority for overturning the bans, but they are simply biding their time - a) for more public support and b) to make the pool of states that ban it incrementally smaller, to lessen the impact of a sweeping ruling.

 

Exactly, because people say horrible things on the net they would not normally say. The right has been very good at that. It's been great for exposing them for what they are.

 

The country would still vote against homosexual marriage. That's why you folks are too scared to let them vote.

And as I've said all along... You know what's great about judicial activism? All it takes to reverse it is more judicial activism.

 

Exactly. They'll probably take up a case in a year or so.

 

Again, they would not be invalidating anyone's marriage. They would be leaving it up to the people of the State's. As it should be and EXACTLY as the Supreme Court will rule.

- - - Updated - - -

I look forward to it.

 

What are you talking about?

If there was a majority for upholding the bans why would they drag it out? That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

If there was a majority for overturning the bans, what they did today would make significantly more sense. And let's be honest, I think they probably have an idea what Kennedy wants to do.

Sounds like you're just doing some mental gymnastics to reassure yourself.

 

It's getting kind of silly at this point, isn't it?

 

No you actually made the case for me. Earlier you asserted they wanted to gain more support from the lower courts and the populous to make the transition easier. But they have the support from the lower courts. So if they were waiting for any side to get more support in order to reduce the dissention it would be the anti-homosexual marriage side. So your logic there doesn't make sense. In fact, if anything, it validates my point.

 

Personally, I don't give a rat's ass if people want to marry within the same sex, or if they wish to marry their German Shepard. But I wish groups would stop morphing the image of the American Flag to create icons to fit the flavor of the month. Please keep the flag out of it. This issue is now DOA, so let's move on.

 

Yep. Now he's saying I helped him towards an illogical, eye-brow raising position? Lol.

It seems as though opponents wish to cling onto some hope. I'd hate to take that away from the poor lad. Let him believe whatever he wants to believe

 

I read it. The denial is unreal.

 

All those cases the Supreme Court has rejected.

Which federal district courts have upheld discrimination?

This is the current state of affairs:

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/09/03/federal-judge-upholds-louisiana-gay-marriage-ban/

You should probably update your little list.

 

One state. Versus how many. God if the shoe was on the other foot I'd be like "yeah, we're losing :/"

It's amazing the lengths some people go to deny reality.

 

No need. I'm confident that progress is inexorable, and am satisfied with the pace. Equality is inevitable.