Major Blow to Homophobes: SCOTUS Refuses to Block Gay Marriage in DC

[Susita 175]

Aside from the fact that your post eloquently states that which I have neither the patience or the energy to express right now...

I lost the patience and energy a while ago...

[Sofiyya 1,687]

True. However, wanting equal rights under law is not narcissism.

Gays have the right to marry. They just have to marry the opposite sex like the rest of us do. It's narcissistic to demand an exception to that norm.

[Danno 1,228]

My point is that the federal Constitution is not the source of marriage rights for anyone, but then, I'm not the one who keeps erroneously insisting that that Constitution is the basis for granting that right. Marriage is regulated by the states, not the feds.

Such an easy ball to catch... yet they don't.

To them it all starts and ends with the Federal Government.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

No but is apparently stuck somewhere.

Keep your delusions and prejudice's to yourself. I really could care less what any other individuals do with each other when they are consenting adults and your prejudice should influence no ones behavior but your own. If you want to feel uncomfortable with the thought of sexual relations between persons of the same sex that is your business, but your feeling it is 'wrong' is wrong.

I also could care less if you worship whipped cream, and like to howl at the moon as your path to salvation.

You are prejudiced against my opinions. Why don't you take your own advice and keep your prejudices to yourself?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Government recognizes marriage for reasons other than taxes.

Government is an element of social order, so the regulation of marriage is a duty it has, and that has been true for centuries the world over.

I would suggest you re-look at history and you couldn't be more wrong here.

I'm not sure what you mean by your third comment.

You are referring to the full faith and credit clause. It is not absolute; an example is the variety of gun laws state by state. There are states that have passed Constitutional amendments against same sex marriage to avoid the recognition of same sex unions recognized by other states.

Full Faith and Credit is a part of the US Constitution and cannot be tossed out by a state constitution. Sorry.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Such an easy ball to catch... yet they don't.

To them it all starts and ends with the Federal Government.

That's because they see the Fed as the big hammer they can use to crush anyone who disagrees with their visions of utopia. They love humanity, but hate humans. Humans are messy.

[Wyld Blu 35]

Actually I laughed too when I read his suggestion that the Gov got involved in Marriage for "tax purposes".

Now that was good.

Someone send him a "time-line" on taxation and the family.

First off, I am not a he, and secondly, please site where I state the government got involved for tax purposes. I may be old, but my memory isn't that bad.

By the way, I am not religious, so, therefore cannot push my religious beliefs or dogma on you or anyone.

-Blu

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I would suggest you re-look at history and you couldn't be more wrong here.

Full Faith and Credit is a part of the US Constitution and cannot be tossed out by a state constitution. Sorry.

You have little understanding of how that works. That's clear.

[jundp 191]

Gays have the right to marry. They just have to marry the opposite sex like the rest of us do. It's narcissistic to demand an exception to that norm.

Just like it's narcissism to demand the right for women to vote? Or blacks to attend the same school as whites? Or for couples of two different races to marry? Or for people to receive the same pay for the same job even if they aren't the same gender?

As well, we aren't just talking about the right to 'marry' but also to have all the rights of a partner under law. Next of kin, for example. There are states that do not recognize a gay partner as being next of kin. You know what that means? That means should one partner be in the hospital dying, the other has no legal right to medical records, to make decisions regarding life-support, organ donation, last will and testament, etc.

That is what I mean when I say equal rights. Don't pretend to misunderstand just because it goes against your belief system.

I think abortion is murder. Yet it's legal. My moral objection has no bearing on the legality or illegality of abortion.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I have yet to see an reasonable and convincing argument as to why same sex marriage should be legal. All I see is emotional diatribes and allegations that anyone against it is a bigot. If that's all it takes to create a right where there is none, our nation is doomed.

So, the 14th amendment of the Constitution which affords equal protection under the law to all citizens is not a convincing argument? Time to fight that liberal rag that most Americans claim to value so much.

"no State shall deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person the equal protection of the laws."

The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly held that marriage is one of the most fundamental rights that we have as Americans under our Constitution. It is an expression of our desire to create a social partnership, to live and share life's joys and burdens with the person we love, and to form a lasting bond and a social identity. The Supreme Court has said that marriage is a part of the Constitution's protections of liberty, privacy, freedom of association, and spiritual identification. In short, the right to marry helps us to define ourselves and our place in a community. Without it, there can be no true equality under the law.

It is true that marriage in this nation traditionally has been regarded as a relationship exclusively between a man and a woman, and many of our nation's multiple religions define marriage in precisely those terms. But while the Supreme Court has always previously considered marriage in that context, the underlying rights and liberties that marriage embodies are not in any way confined to heterosexuals.

Marriage is a civil bond in this country as well as, in some (but hardly all) cases, a religious sacrament. It is a relationship recognized by governments as providing a privileged and respected status, entitled to the state's support and benefits. The California Supreme Court described marriage as a "union unreservedly approved and favored by the community." Where the state has accorded official sanction to a relationship and provided special benefits to those who enter into that relationship, our courts have insisted that withholding that status requires powerful justifications and may not be arbitrarily denied.

[Danno 1,228]

First off, I am not a he, and secondly, please site where I state the government got involved for tax purposes. I may be old, but my memory isn't that bad.

By the way, I am not religious, so, therefore cannot push my religious beliefs or dogma on you or anyone.

-Blu

Then why did you limit marriage to only 2 persons, where did that magical number come from?.... Tradition HAH!

[Obama 2012 1,714]

You have little understanding of how that works. That's clear.

You can't cherry pick the constitution man.... Seriously.

[Wyld Blu 35]

I believe people are pushing the Constitution argument is because, as there are people pushing for laws to allow and not allow it, it becomes critical that we look at the laws and right our country was built upon. If people did not seek to allow or disallow it, it would not be an issue at all.

-Blu-

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

My point is that the federal Constitution is not the source of marriage rights for anyone, but then, I'm not the one who keeps erroneously insisting that that Constitution is the basis for granting that right. Marriage is regulated by the states, not the feds.

Where the state has accorded official sanction to a relationship and provided special benefits to those who enter into that relationship, our courts have insisted that withholding that status requires powerful justifications and may not be arbitrarily denied.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Gays have the right to marry. They just have to marry the opposite sex like the rest of us do. It's narcissistic to demand an exception to that norm.

Did you obtain approval from your state government who you may marry or did you get to make that decision yourself based on your preferences and in pursuit of your happiness?