Same-Sex Marriage is now a Right

H

Hawk

<B>Co-Owner, BravesCenter</B>
Robert Barnes

@scotusreporter

supreme court allows same sex couples ot marry nationwide. opinion by kennedy 5-4
 
Another baffling decision... when did the federal government rule on marriage?

Has the 10th amendment been abolished?
 
sturg33 said:
Another baffling decision... when did the federal government rule on marriage?

Has the 10th amendment been abolished?
Click to expand...

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.
 
50PoundHead said:
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.
Click to expand...

I support gay marriage... but how does this even get heard in the supreme court?
 
AerchAngel said:
The only reason I would agree with. But forcing churches to marry, they better leave it alone.
Click to expand...

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

J7oKNEf.png
 
50PoundHead said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
50PoundHead said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

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.
 
weso1 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

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

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top