Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage nationwide<<MOD WARNING>>

No offense meant but nobody cares what you think is normal.

 

GREAT news and man, what a horrid week for Republicans!

 

I have no idea what they could possibly do about it. Gay unions can't be regulated like abortions.

Republicans should be glad this issue is now off the table and they can move on to discussing the issues that effect and concern the vast majority of Americans.

 

No it wasnt. Marriage like driving requires a license issued by the state and is a privilege. If it were a right you would not need a license to do it.

 

Of course he can. No church can be compelled to marry someone.

 

I'm not gay and I don't feel forced to marry someone of the same sex, so how are you or anyone else being forced to do anything? You really make it sound as if you are going to be personally directly affected when we all know that that is ludicrous.

 

According to who?

All this ruling says is that marriages have to be universally recognized. That was already true before with straight marriages. Nothing has changed except another group has been added to the groups (plural) who could already get married before.

The Supreme court does not make laws, it interprets them. They are saying the laws have ALWAYS been this way, not that anything has changed.

 

And the federal government slowly collects the power to force us all into slavery. I have no problem with same sex marriage being legal but I hate the way it is being forced on the country. No let's not have a civil debate and change peoples minds., lets use the courts and usurp a little more poser from the states. Of course I don't expect neo-marxist to understand the problem.

 

And, assuming your prediction does ring true, they're going to have quite the tough time of it because not only will they have to fight the 1st amendment, they'll have to fight many of the same folks who supported the push for same-sex marriage, myself included, if they tried to use the law to legislate religions. I certainly don't support forcing a church to marry someone they don't want to. I never will. That's not for the law to decide.

 

Of course it does.

Do you bat an eye when a 21+ year old buys booze? An 18 year old has sex? A 17 year old drives a car? A 65+ retires...etc etc. Of course not. Because in our society we have grown accustomed to these norms.

Now when a 10 year old goes and buys booze, or has sex with someone else....you'll have a wtf moment, because it's not the norm in our society. When we approve of something legally, we are making it an acceptable norm and validating it as such.

Not sure how you climbed out on that limb...

 

So lets trample the minorities rights....because that makes more sense?

Sorry this has nothing to do with peoples power.

This is upholding the constitutional value that all people are people and have the right to marry. That is the constitution protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority.

 

Wait. are you under the impression that more Americans oppose SSM than support it? That's not even close to being true.

 

Marriage was ruled a constitutional right in dozens of court cases. Most notably was loving v Virginia.

Churches can't be compelled to marry anyone.

 

June 14-18, 2015

"The U.S. Supreme Court could decide that gays have a constitutional right to marry, which would have the effect of legalizing gay marriage throughout the country. Would you favor or oppose the Supreme Court taking this action?"

Favor: 57% ........ Oppose: 37%​

The 14th Amendment of the Constitution is the guarantee of the individual's equal rights, of course, but it's good to see Americans prevail.

 

US Constitution 'had nothing to do with it,' the Chief Justice writes in a scathing dissent

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-sex-unions-United-States.html#ixzz3eBN6p543
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

No offense taken, as you are just a passing noise. Not important enough to take to heart.

No offense of course.

 

Thats what their supposed to do. Not so in this case or the Obamacare case

 

What harm is there in embracing gay people and allowing them equal access to our legal institutions concerning relationship recognition?

Your rhetoric is hollow and meaningless to most people, no offense. Homosexuality is already normalised in that most people accept it as a perfectly fine variant of the human condition, and most people do not think it is something that one chooses. This ruling is simply of reflection of that - your side was simply unable to demonstrate the harm caused by allowing gay couples the right to equal marriage.

 

Now that's a good way of looking at it if you're someone who opposes it. If it's now going to be legal for everyone everywhere, it doesn't have to be a divisive issue in the elections. Republicans lose a talking point that rallies their base but so too do the lefties who use it for the same reason.

 

Doesn't matter. The ruling stands under equal protection. If a marriage is valid in one state it is valid in all others. That is essentially the ruling.

 

It's exactly what was done, but that is a subject for another thread.

 

You have a comprehension issue. With my solution gays, straights, etc... can marry in any institution that agrees with their matrimony.

 

Not according to the Chief Justice in this case.

 

In this context, yeah, they apply to homosexuality. Because they are examples of "normal" being overturned by law. Interracial marriage was not normal. Freed slaves were not normal. Women voting was not normal. They are examples of extreme change that has occurred in our society in the past...and we survived it just fine.

So is slavery still "normal" even though we legalized it? Is it still wrong for mixed race marriages even though we legalized it? Is it still normal for women not to be able to vote even though we legalized it? You tell me.

In a democracy, "normal" is whatever the hell the majority says it is. Thats how it works in natural law (social darwinism), and that is how it works in US law.

Nowhere is oral sex a species norm either. Nowhere is shaving the species norm. Nowhere is wearing clothes the species norm.

There's lots of things that humans do that are not done in the rest of nature.

 

Did the SCOTUS just force gay marriage onto the states? Yes they did. We didn't vote for it, my state legislatures didn't vote for it but now my state is forced to issue same sex marriage by the federal government. My objection isn't against same sex marriage because i already knew there isn't a legal reason against it. It's the way they have forced it on states. Again I don't expect those who support such use of force to understand the tyrannical aspects of their actions but I hope one day they get the full brunt of the power they so eagerly give the federal government.