SCOTUS and Gay Marriage Debate

I'm not upset.

I don't care how it finishes. It just needs to finish. This really shouldn't be the biggest issue in this country.

We are struggling to recover economically, and all politicians want to deal with is gay marriage and abortion.

I'm quite sick of it.

No body cares what your politics are, they just want to know where you stand on the above two issues...........

and to me, that is a sad state of affairs.

 

You don't care? Really? I thought that everyone here cared. It may not be the most pressing issue in terms of the number of people effected by it, but for those who are, the inability to marry has a profound impact, just as surely as not having a job, affordable housing or health insurance.

And don't blame the politicians. Republicans are running from it because they see where it's going. Blame the anti equality activists and their lawyers who insist on defending the indefensible.

- - - Updated - - -

Thank you!

 

A few take-aways from Mondays SCOTUS action. Yes it's a slippery slope- To equality!

 

This is very interesting in itself, and also in the way the anti equality crowd MOD EDIT>>>BAITING<<< are also mostly silent on this weeks development. Is it apoplectic shock, confusion, depression, or have they all fled to Russia or Uganda? Where are you guys, We were having so much fun.

 

What a week!! Thirty 5 states in all with marriage equality now, or soon to be!!

 

Supreme Court: Same-Sex Marriage Can Move Forward In Idaho

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/supreme-court-lifts-stay-idaho-gay-marriage

There goes the 9th Circuit!! I won't say I told you so......not just yet anyway but SCOTUS just made it clear what will happen when and if they actually here a marriage case

 

.

Source: THE CONSTITUTIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY CENTER http://theusconstitution.org/

 

Supreme Court here we come. Tennessee is in the same circuit-the 6th- as Michigan. Also included is Ohio, and Kentucky . It looks like there will be cases coming up from all of those states challenging the 6th Circuit's idiotic which upheld state bans on marriage equality.
Just hours after the Ohio plaintiffs who lost their same-sex marriage case in the 6th Circuit filed a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, the plaintiffs in the Tennessee case have also filed.

 

Well, this thread has been dormant for a while now. I thought that this would be a good time to revive it. It will be interesting to see who the real winner of this debate is. Does anybody know which justices voted to take the cases?

 

This jackass wants to be president but he has NO IDEA how our system of laws and government works. God help us!!

 

Let them squirm!!

 

.........

 

Greetings. I was wondering if you had seen this?

Most interesting is the analysis of Roberts and Kennedy

 

Do you have a link for this?

 

I always include a link when I post stuff like this, although I see that it's not there for some reason. This story was all over the internet. I'm sure that you can find it or some version of it.

 

WASHINGTON -- Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee disputed what he called the "notion of judicial supremacy" on Tuesday, arguing states would have the final say on gay marriage regardless of whether the Supreme Court rules that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.

Huckabee, a conservative evangelical and potential 2016 presidential candidate, said a Supreme Court ruling, expected this year, would ultimately be moot because "one branch of government does not overrule the other two."

"One thing I am angry about though ... is this notion of judicial supremacy, where if the court makes a decision, I hear governors and even some aspirants to the presidency say, 'Well that's settled, it's the law of the land.' No, it's not the law of the land," Huckabee said in an interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/21/mike-huckabee-gay-marriage-supreme-court_n_6512042.html

 

Here's a better link for the Huckabee position re: the authority of the Supreme Court. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4i72rVpqKt8

 

Thanks. I think that he's delusional

 

I DESPISE Huckabee, and as you well know you and I are on the same side of this issue, and this might be needlessly nitpicky, but he is "technically" correct. They could "overturn" a ruling of SCOTUS by passing a Federal Constitutional Amendment to do so. There's no way in hell that's going to happen, but at least in theory, it could.

 

Here we go... Let the games begin.
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/Huelskamp-constitutional-amendment-Supreme/2013/06/27/id/512238/

 

Yes , well they have been talking about this ever since gay marriage was on the horizon. DOMA sec.3 was tossed out almost two years ago and this amendment has not gained any traction as far as I know. Then it would take 38 states to ratify it. Not happening. These people are just wasting time and money.

I&#8217;m more concerned about the state&#8217;s new Jim Crow laws and religious freedom claims that are going to ensure decades more litigation and divisiveness. Alabama wants to abolish marriage all together rather that include gays. Oklahoma wants to make it strictly a religious institution. What idiocy! They need to get over it

 

This is interesting. When this was written in June 2013, Huelskamp said "Today 37 states still have traditional-marriage amendments and laws," he said. "Those are not overruled, which is the good side of this." Today, 37 states have marriage equality

 

This is one thing I don't get. Why don't people just say what they mean? What's meant is that 37 states have gay marriage, right? Saying that states that have monogamous non-related 18+ heterosexual and homosexual marriages have marriage equality would be like saying that countries which give full rights to whites and Asians (but not to blacks, hispanics, etc.) have racial equality. :/

Such a country obviously wouldn't have racial equality, it's just a fluffy better-sounding phrase.

 

What are you talking about? I say exactly what I think. I have no idea of what your point is here. I considered you one of the more rational and intelligent people here, even if we don't agree on much. Now you seem to have run off the rails. WTF??

 

It's quite simple - people call gay marriage 'marriage equality', when the only previously denied group that now has access to marriage are homosexuals. Many others have been denied, and continue to be denied. So in this comparison, if a country only gave full civil/political rights to whites, and then expanded that access to Asians, there would still be other groups denied - hispanics, blacks, etc. Wouldn't it be silly to call that "racial equality" when full rights are still being denied to other racial groups? And so I don't see any sense in calling gay marriage "marriage equality". When you say that "37 states now have marriage equality" you don't mean "37 states now have marriage equality" you mean "37 states now have gay marriage".