Republican Governors Refuse To Abide By SCOTUS Decision

It doesn't need to not be a choice in order to protected. Consider religion.

Choices have been extended Constitutional protection repeatedly over the years. Aside from that though, no reasonable person believes sexual orientation is decided on a whim. Yes it's a choice to be in a same-sex relationship, but then so is the choice to be in a mixed-race relationship. There's no reason why a person's gender or race, which they do not choose, should dictate who they can and cannot marry.

 

Whaler.....even former members of the anti-gay marriage "National Organization for Marriage"?


admit that the 'war' is lost....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/20/jennifer-roback-morse-gay-marriage-_n_5695721.html

 

I wonder what took you so long to respond. If Obama does it, then why hasn't he been impeached by the House?

 

Eventually, even Red State Governors aren't going to want to go down in history looking like George Wallace standing at the door of the University of Alabama.

Especially when the POLLS are clearly going against the homophobes.

 

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55%
http://www.gallup.com/poll/169640/sex-marriage-support-reaches-new-high.aspx

...and not that the opinion of others should make one iota of difference in a person's choice of marital partner. As for "perverted"...should we invade heterosexual couple's bedrooms to make sure that they are not indulging in over the top fetishes? The anti-gay marriage crowd really cracks me up.

 

The appellate court decision that SCOTUS refuse to review only affects those States in the lawsuit. Other lawsuits could arise counter to those and prompt SCOTUS to take up up again. It is not 'law of the land' as some think.

 

It appears you can't see past a persons penis or vagina. A relationship where marriage or common law factors in is rooted in far more than sexual interest.. The irony that you would call another persons behavior perverted probably is lost on you.

 

Really? Are you saying that just because they are courts...no matter what, they cannot operate outside their Constitutional bounds?

 

That's a skewed poll....like the ones that said Romney wasn't going to win in a landslide!

 

It pretty much is for now. Only a matter of time for SCOTUS to follow.

 

The USSC decision did not approve gay marriage. Confused?

 

SCOTUS's decision not to hear the case allowed the 4th, 7th and 10th circuit rulings to stand. And those states "refusing" to recognise them lie under their respective jurisdictions. Are you confused?

 

Ahh but those courts found a broad Constitutional right for same-sex couples to marry. It's difficult to imagine how that precedent could only apply to the states involved in the lawsuits.

 

Nope....didn't even hint at that.

 

Why? Even a Budget can't make it passed Harry Reid's Iron Dome in the Senate.

 

I'm talking about the House of Representatives, not the US Senate.

 

Why is incestuous marriage illegal then.

 

There are some very detached people on this site who have no clue about what's going on in America. They are refreshing: they remind me of how things used to be and how far we've progressed.

 

Why would they when it will go nowhere in Harry Reid's do nothing Senate?

 

For the same reason they tried to repeal ACA numerous times when they knew it had no chance of going anywhere in Harry Reid's Senate.

 

It is just the right denying and disparaging Individual Liberty in the name of the subective value of religious morals.

Article 4, Section 2 was ratified by the several States.

 

The SCOTUS ruled in June 2013 that the issue was to be left up to the states. So the governors are honoring that ruling, which stated that the issue of same-sex marriages would be decided by the individual states, and not by a federal court ruling. SCOTUS really screwed the pooch on this one the other day.

 

That's their decision to make.....not yours isn't it?

 

Just proving my point is all i'm doing.