OFFICIAL: Gay marriage debate

[Judicial review]

There is no dictatorship.

The Court has the power.

The haters can get over it.

The court doesn't have the power. It shouldn't be doing this as I explained above. read.

 

[JakeStarkey]

To decide on this issue?

Guys, that is not what is being taught in schools and universities.

You are going to have to live with it.

 

[A Perez]

Gays dont hurt me or anyone else when they marry. So im for gay marriage.

 

[JakeStarkey]

They don't hurt anybody.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nope, we stopped you from doing that.

How do you explain
Kagan and Ginsburg? Both lesbians and advocates of gay marriage.

One, you can't prove it. Two, the other seven are all heteros. So what, son, it does not matter to rational people.

 

[xdangerousxdavex]

It's my God given right to argue against queer marriages and to claim I'm not homophobe. I don't care what the government do, what the courts decide, in SSM I see no good for the country.

 

[Skylar]

There is no reason at all for the Supreme court to decide what constitutes as marriage, when it already struck down section 3 of DOMA, and combine that with not hearing the case you say let it stand.

There's an inconsistency in the federal courts. With all circuit courts to rule on the matter save one deciding that gay marriage bans are unconstitutional.

Some states have had their bans overriden by the federal courts. Others haven't. That's an inconsistency that the court has to address. As it stands it hasn't been 'left for the states to decide'. In most of the nation, the feds have overturned state bans.

I don't care what a 3rd district appeals court did or didn't do, the supreme court is the highest court in our land and can send a message without ruling just as easy as they can with ruling.

Oh, they've sent a message. The USSC has preserved every ruling that overturned state gay marriage bans. Without exception. They also denied every stay requested by every state that is trying to defend gay marriage bans. Allowing gay marriages to be performed in those states.

This included Alabama AFTER the USSC had agreed to hear Obergefell. A move that so clearly signaled the court's intent that Scalia and Thomas issued an unprecedented dissent on the refusal to stay declaring that the court shouldn't telegraph its intent so clearly.

And then there is Windsor v. US. Where Scalia in his dissent found that the court had made its position on gay marriage 'beyond mistaking'. And that the court applying the logic of the Windsor decision to stay gay marriage bans was 'inevitable'.

There's a reason why the federal court record on gay marriage is 44 to 2 in favor of gay marriage.

 

[Skylar]

It's my God given right to argue against queer marriages and to claim I'm not homophobe. I don't care what the government do, what the courts decide, in SSM I see no good for the country.

Conservatives are looking at this the wrong way. This is clearly a victory for their ideology. For years they've been pushing the value of commitment, of monogamy, of marriage, of family. And conservatives were right. So right in fact that they've convinced the gays and lesbians of its value. And they're trying to see the same benefits of commitment, monogamy, marriage and family that conservatives have been lauding.

Take a bow, Conservatives. You were right.

 

[danielpalos]

Only the Right likes to waste (Other) Peoples' tax monies and other Peoples morals', at the same time on frivolous litigation in legal venues.

The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states.