There's a lot of closet homophobes out there.
Either that or people who still think churches would be forced to marry gay/lesbian couples. Essentially the separate but equal crowd.
There's a lot of closet homophobes out there.
Wonder what caused that spike between November '12 and March '13. Election backlash?
This critical text is the handiwork of John Binghama now-forgotten American who was a key leader during Reconstruction. Described by Justice Hugo Black as the Madison of the ... 14th Amendment, Bingham pushed for new protections that would respond to the abuses of the former rebels and set important constitutional baselines for post-Civil War America. Bingham finally got his wish on April 28, 1866, when the Joint Committee on Reconstruction approved his text for Section 1 of its proposed Amendment.
A few days earlier, the committee had agreed on language for the proposed amendment that focused exclusively on the evils of racial discrimination, reading, No discrimination shall be made by any State, or by the United States, as to the civil rights of persons because of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. However, Bingham convinced his fellow committee members to broaden this language.
Binghams key move was to craft a new provision that promised equal protection of the laws for all persons, not just African Americans. In one of the most important edits in American history, Bingham added text that was, as he later explained, a simple, strong, plain declaration that equal laws and equal and exact justice shall hereafter be secured within every State of the Union, guaranteeing equal protection for any person, no matter whence he comes, or how poor, how weak, how simpleno matter how friendless.
Without Binghams revisions to Section 1, its entirely possible that the equal protection clause would have outlawed only racial discriminationa major addition to our Constitution, to be sure, but a long way from the provision that we have today. Instead, Bingham incorporated into our Constitution the broad promise of the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal. Better still, he perfected and universalized it by substituting the word person for Jeffersons men.
I am so very glad that Slate posted this (and had hoped someone would post it here). The story of the 14th Amendment's wording isn't well-known, and more folks should get acquainted.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts/how-keep-supreme-court-same-sex-marriage-arguments-n347861How to Keep up With Supreme Court Same-Sex Marriage Arguments
The Supreme Court will release the audio and a transcript of Tuesday's oral argument in the same-sex marriage cases. The entire argument will last two and a half hours.
The argument will begin at 10 am. The first 90 minutes is on the question whether states can refuse to grant marriage licenses to gay couples. Then another hour is on the question whether states can refuse to recognize the marriages of gay couples that were legally performed elsewhere.
The Court will provide the audio and transcript of the argument on the first question as soon as the digital files are available for upload to the court's website. That should be around 12:30 pm.
The audio and transcript from the second question should come around around 2 pm.
Pete Williams
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments on same-sex marriage, a new poll shows that more American adults are believed to be in gay marriages or domestic partnerships than had been previously thought.
A Gallup poll released on Friday found that nearly 2 million adults are part of a same-sex couple, of whom about 780,000 are married. Those results are higher than findings by the Census Bureau and by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Still, all three findings agree that the number of gay marriages and partnerships have been rising in recent years.
I am number 38 in line. Whoo! Getting in for the full hearing.
I am number 38 in line. Whoo! Getting in for the full hearing.
Sweet - you have a front row seat to the circus that'll pass by over the weekend! NOM will be throwing their big rally tomorrow. You should periscope/meerkat if anything interesting happens!I am number 38 in line. Whoo! Getting in for the full hearing.
![]()
"Saving America"Sweet - you have a front row seat to the circus that'll pass by over the weekend! NOM will be throwing their big rally tomorrow. You should periscope/meerkat if anything interesting happens!
![]()
EDIT: I should have read the text at the bottom.
So once this shoe drops, what's the over/under on how long it'll take before polygamy rights get mainstream attention? It creates pretty strong precedent for the freedom of consenting adults.
Unless they determine that sexual orientation is a suspect classification (won't happen).
I think that's sort of where this is all going. At least, heightened scrutiny is.
I am number 38 in line. Whoo! Getting in for the full hearing.
http://i.imgur.com/D8egK45h.jpg [./img][/QUOTE]
That's awesome, what made you decide to spend the time camping out to get into the hearing? Also, are you planning on posting summaries?
Don't know if it's been mentioned in this thread but there's a referendum in Ireland next month on this issue, if it passes then marriage equality will be written into the constitution. Polls would suggest strong support and all the main political parties are supporting it, turnout is the only thing that could be a threat.
http://www.demotix.com/photo/7426269/vote-no-gay-marriage-referendum-campaign-posters-dublin
Yup. For any politicians hoping that this arena of issues goes away in June, they're severely deluding themselves.Even when we get full marriage equality, the fight still won't be over in red states with discrimination and "religious freedom" laws. It is really frustrating...
The NO campaign posters are - not surprisingly - awful:
http://www.demotix.com/photo/7426269/vote-no-gay-marriage-referendum-campaign-posters-dublin
Same-sex adoption passed a few weeks ago, so most of the NO campaign talking points are moot.
I don't know what the hell is wrong with Jindal. I used to think even the most ideologically driven Republican would have to have some bit of pragmatism within them that'd come out while controlling an executive branch of government, but he just seems fucking nuts.Yup. For any politicians hoping that this arena of issues goes away in June, they're severely deluding themselves.
Bobby Jindal appears to be ready to drive our state's economy over a cliff for this issue, and who knows what Texas or Alabama (Roy Moore!) will do in response.
I think Roberts will side with marriage equality, but I think it will be moot because I think Kennedy will as well.This is causing me anxiety. What does smart money say on where Roberts will lean?
So once this shoe drops, what's the over/under on how long it'll take before polygamy rights get mainstream attention? It creates pretty strong precedent for the freedom of consenting adults.
I hope this case works out for the best, but I couldn't help but have a sensible chuckle at the names involved that will live on through american history.
"Today where are learning about the great historical supreme court cases everyone. We'll be discussing Brown vs THE BOARD OF EDUCATION, Dred Scott vs Sandford...aaaaaaaaaand Obergefell vs hodges...
Very important case but it doesn't exactly have that epic ring to it like some of the others heh.
The problem is that many of the legal rights bundled up in marriage are binary in nature (power of attorney, primary beneficiary of your estate, etc). The concept of affirming your love to multiple people isn't the problem, it's the incompatibilities with legal statuses associated with the marriage contract.
That's awesome, what made you decide to spend the time camping out to get into the hearing? Also, are you planning on posting summaries?
You are a gentleman and a scholar, dear sir! It is awesome to have a Gaffer there doing some frontline reporting. Your efforts are greatly appreciated.In terms of updates, sure, I can keep posting up through the oral arguments on Tuesday and my thoughts after, but that's about it. To be frank, I really just want to witness any SCOTUS oral argument. It could be something ridiculously boring and I'd still thoroughly enjoy it.
The NO campaign posters are - not surprisingly - awful:
http://www.demotix.com/photo/7426269/vote-no-gay-marriage-referendum-campaign-posters-dublin
Same-sex adoption passed a few weeks ago, so most of the NO campaign talking points are moot.
I think it's about letting gay couples having children through surrogacy?What does the surrogacy poster even getting at? Isn't surrogacy for couples that can't concieve themselves but want a baby? In that case the baby would have parents for life.
The same reason some counties in red states that had their SSM bans overturned are now not issuing marriage licenses to anyone. They're so determined to prevent gay couples from having rights, they're willing to screw over everyone else in the process.What does the surrogacy poster even getting at? Isn't surrogacy for couples that can't concieve themselves but want a baby? In that case the baby would have parents for life.