Same-Sex Marriage is now a Right

[Hawk]

Robert Barnes
@scotusreporter
supreme court allows same sex couples ot marry nationwide. opinion by kennedy 5-4

[sturg33]

Another baffling decision... when did the federal government rule on marriage?

Has the 10th amendment been abolished?

[Hawk]

I feel like the country has changed so much in the past week.

For the better I believe, hope.

[50PoundHead]

Another baffling decision... when did the federal government rule on marriage?

Has the 10th amendment been abolished?

Just guessing, but I'm thinking this is about the 14th amendment in the court's eyes. Don't disagree with your point to the extent I don't know why the government is in the marriage business at all except to enforce the contractual part of the equation.

[sturg33]

Just guessing, but I'm thinking this is about the 14th amendment in the court's eyes. Don't disagree with your point to the extent I don't know why the government is in the marriage business at all except to enforce the contractual part of the equation.

I support gay marriage... but how does this even get heard in the supreme court?

[AerchAngel]

to enforce the contractual part of the equation.

The only reason I would agree with. But forcing churches to marry, they better leave it alone.

[50PoundHead]

I support gay marriage... but how does this even get heard in the supreme court?

I don't disagree. Why the government is in this debate at all is a head-scratcher to me. The only thing the law should ensure is that each party in a marriage relationship should receive the proper level of material benefit in the event the contract is dissolved.

[50PoundHead]

The only reason I would agree with. But forcing churches to marry, they better leave it alone.

I agree. I believe in a very high wall between the church and the state and no church should be forced to perform a same sex marriage. Churches are exempt from a number of laws and they should be exempt from this as well.

[Hawk]

This should answer a lot of questions (Kennedy's affirming opinion):

[AerchAngel]

I don't disagree. Why the government is in this debate at all is a head-scratcher to me. The only thing the law should ensure is that each party in a marriage relationship should receive the proper level of material benefit in the event the contract is dissolved.

You are right, let the states decide how divorce is handled, just like heterosexual marriage. Why do they get SPECIAL treatment?

But next is them assaulting churches in making them recognize their marriage. Last I heard, all churches are different due to their cultures, forcing them to upset their culture is a wrong message.

[AerchAngel]

This should answer a lot of questions (Kennedy's affirming opinion):

No mention of religion. I like it.

[The Chosen One]

Between the Confederate flag, obamacare, and this ruling is the south ready to rise again and secede?

[Dalyn]

Churches/pastors can still refuse to officiate interracial weddings, nearly 50 years after it became fully legal in the US. I'm sure the same will be true about gay weddings in 2065.

[weso1]

I don't disagree. Why the government is in this debate at all is a head-scratcher to me. The only thing the law should ensure is that each party in a marriage relationship should receive the proper level of material benefit in the event the contract is dissolved.

For benefits and stuff like that. Some states wanted to recognize gay marriage and some didn't (l.e. not all marriages received the same benefits). The reason it went as high as it did is because some see it as a human rights issue backed by the constitution.

I personally didn't see it that way and I think it should've been left up to the states. I support gay marriage and eventually every state was going to allow it anyway. I am a huge believer in states rights though, and I think this decision is another slippery slope that erodes the rights of individual states. Liberal judges are much more inclined to take away the idea of individual state rights.

[The Chosen One]

How long weso do you think it would've taken Mississippi, Alabama and South Carolina to pass same sex marriage? 30 years?

[AerchAngel]

Churches/pastors can still refuse to officiate interracial weddings, nearly 50 years after it became fully legal in the US. I'm sure the same will be true about gay weddings in 2065.

LGBT community is a stronger force than blacks and Farrakhan is not helping by opening his big mouth. I thought that race hating bastard was dead, but somehow he still talks like he is from the black version of Stormfront.

[AerchAngel]

For benefits and stuff like that. Some states wanted to recognize gay marriage and some didn't (l.e. not all marriages received the same benefits). The reason it went as high as it did is because some see it as a human rights issue backed by the constitution.

I personally didn't see it that way and I think it should've been left up to the states. I support gay marriage and eventually every state was going to allow it anyway. I am a huge believer in states rights though, and I think this decision is another slippery slope that erodes the rights of individual states. Liberal judges are much more inclined to take away the idea of individual state rights.

They take away all rights that the Right doesn't like, but when the Right want their rights, they won't allow them. Funny how that works. We are not a free nation anymore, it depends who sits on the throne and thrones, if you will. If you don't agree with them, you are not free.

Freedom of expression and opinion is out the door. This is not America anymore. You have no rights because if you don't like something or do something to make someone upset and they will sue you or make it hard for you because you don't agree with them.

[weso1]

How long weso do you think it would've taken Mississippi, Alabama and South Carolina to pass same sex marriage? 30 years?

I don't know nor do I think it's relevant. This is a court judgement and that shouldn't even be in consideration.

[Dalyn]

LGBT community is a stronger force than blacks and Farrakhan is not helping by opening his big mouth. I thought that race hating bastard was dead, but somehow he still talks like he is from the black version of Stormfront.

Who would want to ruin their wedding by FORCING someone to officiate it? Even if the majority did (I'm sure a small kooky minority wants to), religion is a stronger force in this country than anything else. Their boot will remain on our throats for at least another generation or two. I wouldn't worry about it being removed in your lifetime.

[Hawk]

John Roberts: “Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it.”