SCOTUS strikes down gay marriage bans, legalizing marriage equality nationwide

Status
Not open for further replies.
The happiest place on Earth (no, not Tijuana) joins the party!!

VlX6jye.png
 
icarus-daedelus said:
This is weak stuff even for an Originalist argument, imo. The 14th Amendment does not call for equal protection solely or primarily or mostly for black people, or even "on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude" as the 15th Amendment explicitly does for voting rights. Statutes like this are written broadly for a reason; if they had wanted to limit it they would and could have.

compared to:

As for the lack of expected references to tiered scrutiny, those are merely a practical set of precedent-based guidelines that evolved organically over time, with no particular basis in either the Amendment itself or whatever intent we can presume to divine from the mind of John Bingham when he wrote it. Why anyone insists that the court adhere to it, I'm not really sure, except out of a reverence for tradition and subsequent vain attempts at a semblance of consistency. They can certainly interpret the Equal Protection Clause without its aid.
Click to expand...

Woah, calm down there bud. I did not say that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was limited to race, I was merely qualifying that it's history made it specifically sensitive to race based discrimination. Obviously it applies more broadly than that.
 
Reading the dissents, yes Scalia is salty as hell but the real amazing one is Thomas. What a loathsome pile of shit he is.
 
The most embarrassing thing about Jindal's actions is how transparent they are. He's running for president, his numbers are low, and he's trying to score a meaningless victory with the evangelical voter base.
 
Checked, and apparently my hometown in texas from my childhood days is refusing to give any gay couples licenses 'until they get instructions form the attorney general'

I figured they would pull that card, given how rural the place is. A lot of pretty religious conservatives in that area dying to find a legal way to continue discriminating.
 
When he drops out of the race in a few months, I'm calling in sick to work so that I can mock and enjoy. The bastard.

Personal note:
This day is a day I've waited for for a loooong time. There was this thought in the back of my head that took seed after the disaster that was Bowers v Hardwick: these major issues will be settled in court. This would be especially true for those of us who live in the backwards-ass South; we'd need the force of the federal court system to force our states to live-up to the U.S. Constitution's guarantees.

Thank god that we have a friendly judiciary and a President who'll be willing to force compliance with this court's ruling. There will be weddings in my hometown soon. For many, the long wait will soon be over.
 
Mr_Antimatter said:
Checked, and apparently my hometown in texas from my childhood days is refusing to give any gay couples licenses 'until they get instructions form the attorney general'

I figured they would pull that card, given how rural the place is. A lot of pretty religious conservatives in that area dying to find a legal way to continue discriminating.
Click to expand...

It's a Friday anyways, probably talking a half day. Might as well kick it off until Monday. Getting confirmation isn't necessarily a bad thing, also stepping on the toes of the state can get you into some shit you don't want to deal with.

I'd just print out some new forms and go at it, but I understand why places not already convinced might want to hold back.
 
HylianTom said:
When he drops out of the race in a few months, I'm calling in sick to work so that I can mock and enjoy. The bastard.

Personal note:
This day is a day I've waited for for a loooong time. There was this thought in the back of my head that took seed after the disaster that was Bowers v Hardwick: these major issues will be settled in court. This would be especially true for those of us who live in the backwards-ass South; we'd need the force of the federal court system to force our states to live-up to the U.S. Constitution's guarantees.

Thank god that we have a friendly judiciary and a President who'll be willing to force compliance with this court's ruling. There will be weddings in my hometown soon. For many, the long wait will soon be over.
Click to expand...

One of my buddies at work actually called off today because of the ruling. It's pretty sweet, he always takes time to go to the Pride Parades no matter how far or close they are. He must be beyond belated today.
 
icarus-daedelus said:
No worries, I'm plenty calm - I was only teasing apart and rebutting your rationale for supporting Scalia and his ridiculous jurisprudence on this. :p You can't really expect to assert things like this and not feel some sort of pushback or response:


Scalia is capable of writing good, well-rationalized opinions, as much as I fundamentally disagree with him on many of them. This was not one of those, even given whatever minor advantage it might have over Thomas' baffling and even more embarrassing offer this go-round.
Click to expand...

I think I should clarify I don't agree with Scalia's position concerning the legality of same-sex marriage, I do agree with his dissent which picks apart the majority's rationale. In fact, I'm reading Robert's dissent now and I think he actually does a better job supporting why the majority's decision is correct as he attempts to compare the majority's decision with Lochner era rationale.

He notes that post-Lochner the Court agreed that:

Roberts J. said:
"Our precedents have required that implied fundamental rights be “objectively, deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition,” and “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty, such that neither liberty nor justice would exist if they were sacrificed. Glucksberg, 521 U. S., at 720–721”
Click to expand...

Thus, gone was the era of the supposed "economic rights" of individuals and the supplanting of Justices own personal social opinions on a particular law. Yet, applying that above stated standard I think it is clear that "marriage" would fit into such a category of an "fundamental right" which is "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty."

Of course, Robert's opinion left a sour taste in my mouth right from the beginning with this outlandish assertion he provides with almost no real support:

Roberts J. said:
"Marriage did not come about as a result of a political movement,discovery, disease, war, religious doctrine, or any other moving force of world history—and certainly not as a result of a prehistoric decision to exclude gays and lesbians. It arose in the nature of things to meet a vital need:ensuring that children are conceived by a mother and father committed to raising them in the stable conditions of a lifelong relationship...Therefore, for the good of children and society, sexual relations that can lead to procreation should occur only between a man and a woman committed to a lasting bond.

Society has recognized that bond as marriage. And by bestowing a respected status and material benefits on married couples, society encourages men and women to conduct sexual relations within marriage rather than without. As one prominent scholar put it, Marriage is a socially arranged solution for the problem of getting people to stay together and care for children that the mere desire for children, and the sex that makes children possible,does not solve.'"
Click to expand...

The fuck did he get that from? Marriage didn't come about from a religious or political movement? Sure...
 
Man God said:
It's a Friday anyways, probably talking a half day. Might as well kick it off until Monday. Getting confirmation isn't necessarily a bad thing, also stepping on the toes of the state can get you into some shit you don't want to deal with.

I'd just print out some new forms and go at it, but I understand why places not already convinced might want to hold back.
Click to expand...

Said forms should have been ready before hand, not like they didn't know this was a possible outcome. It's a shameless stall tactic till they can craft some legislation letting the clerks deny the license based on religious grounds, knowing it could take years to get that through the courts.
 
puQNst2.gif

A little LTTP, but still this was a great thing to wake up to yesterday. The conservative tears was icing on the cake. Truly historic.
 
lumi7890 said:
Remind me again why's he runming for president?
Click to expand...

Because he's term limited as governor, and a failed presidential run raises your profile in case you want to make a Senate run AND raises your book advance when you sign a deal with a political vanity press. Win win.

"Bobby Jindal: Son of Immigrants: An American Tale: Faith and Freedom: Taking Back Our Country from the Left: A Common Sense Guide to Making America Great Again: Faith and Family: Ghost-written by Lynn Vincent"
 
Stumpokapow said:
Because he's term limited as governor, and a failed presidential run raises your profile in case you want to make a Senate run AND raises your book advance when you sign a deal with a political vanity press. Win win.

"Bobby Jindal: Son of Immigrants: An American Tale: Faith and Freedom: Taking Back Our Country from the Left: A Common Sense Guide to Making America Great Again: Faith and Family: Ghost-written by Lynn Vincent"
Click to expand...

You forgot "Part-time Exorcist."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Dave Grohl announces daughter outside of his marriage
2 3
143
10K
Dr.Morris79 replied
If you are reading this you’re gay! LMAO!!!
Live  2 3
142
683
violence replied
UFO? Lets shoot it down
10
240
IAmRei replied
  • Locked
I think my dog might be gay
20
605
T8SC replied
School Phone Bans Spark Analog Revival: iPods Return
43
533
mitch1971 replied
Top Bottom