SCOTUS SSM rulings: DOMA overturned, Prop 8 gone

[Individuality-ness]

Educate me.

Loving v Virginia struck down laws prohibitting interacial marriages in any state

Educate me.

well, the states couldn't ban interracial marriage, no matter how "states-righty" it is

Cool.

[Choronzon]

This is a huge precedent, though, so that's good. And another state legalized. And federal government legalized.

If it's legalized on a federal level, doesn't that render state bans null and void?

My understanding of this ruling is now gay couples in states that allow marriage can get federal marriage benefits. It does not really address the legality of it in states that have banned it.

But like Divair said, its precedent. The highest court in the land has ruled that you can't really rig the system against gay people.

[Ifreann]

Without Macklemore (you know, the guy behind Thrift Shop), Prop 8 and DOMA wouldn't be struck down...

Doubt that's true at all.

[Phocidaea]

Without Macklemore (you know, the guy behind Thrift Shop), Prop 8 and DOMA wouldn't be struck down...

His song for marriage equality is so inspiring...

I like that song, but I don't think a bunch of old coots in black robes were really swayed that much by a song from a hip white rap artist who came on the big scene less than a year ago.

Also, I never use the ignore function. I'm a masochist in the extreme here - I can't resist what douchebaggy thing someone might have to say. I've tried to use it, but I always click to view the posts anyway, so I just turn it off again because all it does is make my life harder.

[Divair]

If it's legalized on a federal level, doesn't that render state bans null and void?

My understanding of this ruling is now gay couples in states that allow marriage can get federal marriage benefits. It does not really address the legality of it in states that have banned it.

But like Divair said, its precedent.

Correct.

Precedent around the globe, too, not just for states. As much as I dislike it, some nations look up to the US. This'll set something of a standard.

[Norstal]

This is a huge precedent, though, so that's good. And another state legalized. And federal government legalized.

If it's legalized on a federal level, doesn't that render state bans null and void?

No. The SCOTUS stance of prop 8 seems to be that it's up to the states to issue the marriage license. But the federal government will recognize all marriage license.

This is why I vehemently oppose states rights.

[Hornesia]

Marriage is defined as a union between man and woman.

Says who?

Dictionaries.

the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage>

From the Merriam-Dexter dictionary.

[Rhodesi]

Marriage is defined as a union between man and woman.

Says who?

Says the fact that in no society, in history, up until the early 2000's (waiting to be debunked on this one), has ever married gays. This is self-evident.

[Herador]

If it's legalized on a federal level, doesn't that render state bans null and void?

My understanding of this ruling is now gay couples in states that allow marriage can get federal marriage benefits. It does not really address the legality of it in states that have banned it.

But like Divair said, its precedent. The highest court in the land has ruled that you can't really rig the system against gay people.

But could another Supreme Court down the line overturn the ruling? Or is the likelihood of that happening too small to matter.

Says who?

Says the fact that in no society, in history, up until the early 2000's (waiting to be debunked on this one), has ever married gays. This is self-evident.

Do you people ever do any research before you say that?

[Divair]

the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage>

Are you fucking blind?

[Choronzon]

Traditional marriage:

My wife who was my brothers widow, and my teenage slave girl I took as plunder from the last city we sacked.

[Individuality-ness]

Says who?

Says the fact that in no society, in history, up until the early 2000's (waiting to be debunked on this one), has ever married gays. This is self-evident.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

Says who?

Dictionaries.

the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage>

From the Merriam-Dexter dictionary.

Definition 2 explicitly defines same-sex marriage as being a form of marriage.

[Nailed to the Perch]

Illinois? Really? Bit of an odd state to come next, I'd expect some place like Oregon, Washington, or maybe some state in New England to be next.

Actually the only thing holding Illinois back from legilsating marriage equality is a cadre of loudmouth bigoted assholes from downstate that their equally bigoted asshole constituency keeps voting into office.

So really the solution isn't to try and get it around that cardre, it's to cut the worthless southern counties off and give them to other states which would be happy to welcome bigoted loudmouth assholes like Indiana or Missouri or Kentucky... after offering amnesty for people who don't want to live in those states and understand that marriage is a fundamental human right.

Speaking as a Missourian, please do not give us your bigoted loudmouth assholes. After Akin went down in flames, I'm gaining hope that MO can reverse its recent trend rightward and get back to its roots as a swing state, so I don't want any influx of stupidity to muck that plan up.

[Agritum]

Says who?

Dictionaries.

the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage>

From the Merriam-Dexter dictionary.

Read what you quote, atleast.

[Divair]

Says who?

Says the fact that in no society, in history, up until the early 2000's (waiting to be debunked on this one), has ever married gays. This is self-evident.

Damn, your history is really shit, isn't it? Go read up a bit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage#Ancient

[Hornesia]

the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage>

Are you fucking blind?

Apparently. I apologize.

[DogDoo 7]

So you know for the future, it's legal in:

DC
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Iowa
Massachusetts
Maryland
Maine
Minnesota
New Hampshire
New York
Rhode Island
Vermont
Washington
And five tribal jurisdictions

This is of course with the hope that the California circuit court won't overturn their decision on prop 8.

The 9th Circuit has to dismiss the case since the Proponents didn't have standing to appeal.
According to this document in the 9th circuit one does not necessarily need to have standing to INTERVENE in a case, so the District Court's ruling would stand.
Which actually results in an interesting precedent. Someone can intervene without standing, but then isn't allowed to appeal the ruling. What happens (purely hypothetical) if the Intervenors without Standing WIN a case, and the losers (with standing) appeal?

[Northern Dominus]

My understanding of this ruling is now gay couples in states that allow marriage can get federal marriage benefits. It does not really address the legality of it in states that have banned it.

But like Divair said, its precedent.

Correct.

Precedent around the globe, too, not just for states. As much as I dislike it, some nations look up to the US. This'll set something of a standard.

It basically is the begging of the end of the "constitution" hand wave argument and sets the groundwork for the "it's icky and I don't like it" argument.
And since that doesn't fly under constitutional law... well then do we need a map?

Says who?

Says the fact that in no society, in history, up until the early 2000's (waiting to be debunked on this one), has ever married gays. This is self-evident.

Got some sauce for that big meaty assertion footlong you've just waved?

[Individuality-ness]

My understanding of this ruling is now gay couples in states that allow marriage can get federal marriage benefits. It does not really address the legality of it in states that have banned it.

But like Divair said, its precedent. The highest court in the land has ruled that you can't really rig the system against gay people.

But could another Supreme Court down the line overturn the ruling? Or is the likelihood of that happening too small to matter.

They could, but the Supreme Court doesn't really like to admit that they're wrong. Also, in this case, they made the right call.

[Ifreann]

Traditional marriage:

My wife who was my brothers widow, and my teenage slave girl I took as plunder from the last city we sacked.

Chop chop, dig dig.

[Greed and Death]

Educate me.

Loving v Virginia struck down laws prohibitting interacial marriages in any state

Yes but did not forbid states from otherwise regulating marriage.

The Loving v. Virginia would have been an argument for prop 8 but for its lack of standing.

Doma section 2 says a state does not have to recognize another state's marriage. If you marry in Georgia the state of Texas need only recognize you are married in Georgia, that your married in Texas. This comes into play with age of marriage fairly often.
Georgia lets a 13 year old girl marry under certain circumstances. So if a 30 year old man married a 13 year old girl in Georgia then moved to Texas two things would happen.
1. Texas would say your not married in Texas.
2. Texas would charge you with statutory rape.

[Vettrera]

Without Macklemore (you know, the guy behind Thrift Shop), Prop 8 and DOMA wouldn't be struck down...

His song for marriage equality is so inspiring...

I love me some thrift shop....
This is nice too tho. All the power to you.

[Divair]

Are you fucking blind?

Apparently. I apologize.

So now you support same sex marriage?


Damn, that was easy.

[Choronzon]

Actually the only thing holding Illinois back from legilsating marriage equality is a cadre of loudmouth bigoted assholes from downstate that their equally bigoted asshole constituency keeps voting into office.

So really the solution isn't to try and get it around that cardre, it's to cut the worthless southern counties off and give them to other states which would be happy to welcome bigoted loudmouth assholes like Indiana or Missouri or Kentucky... after offering amnesty for people who don't want to live in those states and understand that marriage is a fundamental human right.

Speaking as a Missourian, please do not give us your bigoted loudmouth assholes.

We would never do that to you guys. You have enough of your own.