Supreme Court to Decide on Same-Sex Marriage

[Benuty]

This has been said several times before, but isn't this about legal/civil marriages/unions, and not religious ones? So why do people have to get their panties all tied up if this legal marriage and not religious? And even then, there are churches that support same-sex marriages, so there's that.

Because certain people are under the mistaken assumption that their religious belief trumps secular law.

Assuming they even mentally recognize secular law exists.

[Katganistan]

Which shockingly enough, this is.

Or do you not understand how the Supreme Court and the judiciary branch works?

Don't they interpret the constitution? Thats what i got from Civics class..

From the 1990s.

Indeed. And this is therefore a.....

Considering that is directly involves the 14th Amendment of the.......

[Katganistan]

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/marriage

Please note the part about the Supreme Court striking down DOMA at the end.

Ah, the Defense of Marriage act. never understood why some people got riled up when it was struck down.

Because it took away their "it's ONLY allowed between a woman and a man!" card.

[Geilinor]

Because certain people are under the mistaken assumption that their religious belief trumps secular law.

Assuming they even mentally recognize secular law exists.

Is that certain person Scalia?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

The courts are a part of our democracy.

Democracy means rule of the people (rule of the majority). If the court decides something that people don't want, it is not a democracy.

It's a good thing, then, that we're a Constitutional Republic and not a Democracy.

[The balkens]

Don't they interpret the constitution? Thats what i got from Civics class..

From the 1990s.

Indeed. And this is therefore a.....

Considering that is directly involves the 14th Amendment of the.......

Ah, one of the reconstruction era ones!

It guarantees equal protection under the la-

I GET IT!

[Alien Space Bats]

Family law, with regard to marriage, deals with a whole range of issues regarding parental rights and obligations toward the spouses' children; and adultery is a ground for divorce is almost every state.

See what you did there?

What does adultery have to do with a parent's obligations towards his or her children?

Also, no-fault divorce is a thing (and in all 50 States, no less).

[The balkens]

Ah, the Defense of Marriage act. never understood why some people got riled up when it was struck down.

Because it took away their "it's ONLY allowed between a woman and a man!" card.

Don't they have other cards?

Fortunately we have the "Nature" card.

[The Lotophagi]

The courts are a part of our democracy.

Democracy means rule of the people (rule of the majority). If the court decides something that people don't want, it is not a democracy.

Democracies also have constitutions that clearly demarcate the rights and responsibilities of the citizens and of the scope and nature of the democratic government. That's a tradition that goes all the way back to the people that invented democracy, the Athenians. It's from those documents and their interpretation that we get things like the Supreme Court striking down laws - it's a longstanding tradition that those rights and freedoms are inviolable, and neither government dictat or public opinion can break them. It's part of the set of legal safeguards that keeps Western democracies functioning.

[Geilinor]

Because it took away their "it's ONLY allowed between a woman and a man!" card.

Don't they have other cards?

Fortunately we have the "Nature" card.

And the "equal protection under the law" card.

[The balkens]

Don't they have other cards?

Fortunately we have the "Nature" card.

And the "equal protection under the law" card.

quite.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Democracy means rule of the people (rule of the majority). If the court decides something that people don't want, it is not a democracy.

Democracies also have constitutions that clearly demarcate the rights and responsibilities of the citizens and of the scope and nature of the democratic government. That's a tradition that goes all the way back to the people that invented democracy, the Athenians. It's from those documents and their interpretation that we get things like the Supreme Court striking down laws.

Uuuuugh.

Athens was chaos in motion when it came to Democracy. Hell, we're better than they were at this.

[Katganistan]

Why is the court even deciding it? Where has democracy gone?? Who elected the court??

SSM is a political issue and people should decide it! Either through a referendum or through elected representatives.
As far as I know people in Mississippi do not want gay marriage. And if it is legalized there against the will of the people it will be a downfall of democracy!

1) The United States of America is a republic. Please go look up what that means.

2) The Constitution, and its Amendments, define what the government of the United States is, what powers it has, and how it creates and enforces the laws for the protection of the people.

3) The Supreme Court was created by the Constitution to be the ultimate authority on interpreting what the laws of the US are.

4) Please, for God's sake, learn how the government works. Naturalized citizens have to take a test proving that they know more about the Constitution and the US Government than the people born here, apparently.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Why is the court even deciding it? Where has democracy gone?? Who elected the court??

SSM is a political issue and people should decide it! Either through a referendum or through elected representatives.
As far as I know people in Mississippi do not want gay marriage. And if it is legalized there against the will of the people it will be a downfall of democracy!

1) The United States of America is a republic. Please go look up what that means.

2) The Constitution, and its Amendments, define what the government of the United States is, what powers it has, and how it creates and enforces the laws for the protection of the people.

3) The Supreme Court was created by the Constitution to be the ultimate authority on what the laws of the US are.

4) Please, for God's sake, learn how the government works. Naturalized citizens have to take a test proving that they know more about the Constitution and the US Government than the people born here, apparently.

Actually its a 10 question interview, but we don't know which 10 questions they are going to ask so we have to know about all of the constitution and government anyhow.

If you pay attention to your classes you can pass it.

[Katganistan]

Because it took away their "it's ONLY allowed between a woman and a man!" card.

Don't they have other cards?

Fortunately we have the "Nature" card.

Indeed. But you know 'it's unnatural' is right around the corner despite the data regarding same sex intercourse among animals.

I wonder what gymnastics will ensue around fish and amphibians that can in fact change their biological sex.....

Other than "it's people!" once the "it's unnatural!" argument fails.

[Anglo-California]

And the people who are opposed to state's rights are nowhere to be found when it is the states who have done more for gay marriage than the federal government.

[The Lotophagi]

Democracies also have constitutions that clearly demarcate the rights and responsibilities of the citizens and of the scope and nature of the democratic government. That's a tradition that goes all the way back to the people that invented democracy, the Athenians. It's from those documents and their interpretation that we get things like the Supreme Court striking down laws.

Uuuuugh.

Athens was chaos in motion when it came to Democracy. Hell, we're better than they are at this.

I didn't say that it worked 100% of the time, but the tradition of having a constitution of that sort does go back to them.

[Geilinor]

And the people who are opposed to state's rights are nowhere to be found when it is the states who have done more for gay marriage than the federal government.

States' rights historically was used to justify slavery, secession, and segregation.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

And the people who are opposed to state's rights are nowhere to be found when it is the states who have done more for gay marriage than the federal government.

See I am not 100% against state's rights, but I rather like Federalism in its current form

[Mavorpen]

And the people who are opposed to state's rights are nowhere to be found when it is the states who have done more for gay marriage than the federal government.

[Shaggai]

Don't they have other cards?

Fortunately we have the "Nature" card.

Indeed. But you know 'it's unnatural' is right around the corner despite the data regarding same sex intercourse among animals.

I wonder what gymnastics will ensue around fish and amphibians that can in fact change their genders.....

Other than "it's people!" once the "it's unnatural!" argument fails.

"It's unnatural" is, at least in Catholic theology, a matter of natural law and teleology, which isn't affected by any prevalence in animals.

[Mavorpen]

And the people who are opposed to state's rights are nowhere to be found when it is the states who have done more for gay marriage than the federal government.

See I am not 100% against state's rights, but I rather like Federalism in its current form

I am. I'm fine with state's powers though.

[Katganistan]

1) The United States of America is a republic. Please go look up what that means.

2) The Constitution, and its Amendments, define what the government of the United States is, what powers it has, and how it creates and enforces the laws for the protection of the people.

3) The Supreme Court was created by the Constitution to be the ultimate authority on what the laws of the US are.

4) Please, for God's sake, learn how the government works. Naturalized citizens have to take a test proving that they know more about the Constitution and the US Government than the people born here, apparently.

Actually its a 10 question interview, but we don't know which 10 questions they are going to ask so we have to know about all of the constitution and government anyhow.

If you pay attention to your classes you can pass it.

I took the 50 question practice about forty minutes ago. Care to guess how many I got right? (I wasn't perfect, but nearly so.)

I can only imagine what many in this argument would get.

[Alien Space Bats]

You beg the question, "Is 'gay marriage' marriage?" It's a circular argument that the right to marry includes homosexuals because the point being argued is whether or not same-sex relationships are or should be considered marriages in the first place.

If this were the Olympics, you'd get a 9.7 for that backflip.

The question of whether same-sex marriage "is" marriage is irrelevant. In some places in America, it clearly is.

Besides, the same argument could have been applied in Loving: "Is 'interracial marriage' marriage?" It had certainly never been so in Virginia before said case was heard, so...

You're asking for an argument stronger than rational basis review. Being in a heterosexual relationship and having children are significantly correlated, so the opposite-sex definition of marriage is rational.

And being in an INFERTILE heterosexual relationship offers EXACTLY THE SAME chance of children as a same-sex marriage does.

The argument -- but some infertile heterosexuals marry -- is wrong because we're not arguing a least restrictive means test.

Wrong. The fact that States do not ban infertile heterosexual marriage shows that they have NO demonstrated interest in using marriage as a vehicle for promoting fertility. So on what rational grounds can they allow infertile heterosexuals to marry, while forbidding same-sex couples from doing so as well?

ADDEDNUM: The reason that the "least restrictive means" test doesn't apply is multifold. First, if we were to apply such a test in its purest form, we'd have to ALLOW same-sex marriage, because that would represent the "least restrictive means" of achieving the state's presumed goal here (namely, that of creating a nurturing and mutually supportive family environment); simply put, the "least restrictive means" of doing so would be to allow ALL committed couples to marry with as few limitations as possible, and just expect that among all marriages so contracted, there will be enough of the right kind to meet the ends of public policy.

If, on the other hand, fertility WAS a necessity in order to have the "right" kind of marriage, then a doctor's certification of reproductive capability would be EXACTLY what was required to achieve public policy ends in creating "proper child-producing" families, as as such would pass said "least restrictive means" test. Nor would such a certification be any harder to achieve or more intrusive than other limitations that have been put forward over the years, such as guarantees against excessive consanguinity, venereal disease, or other such requirements.

So, again, your citation of the "least restrictive means" test is a complete and total red herring here.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

See I am not 100% against state's rights, but I rather like Federalism in its current form

I am. I'm fine with state's powers though.

Potato potahtoeh