Support NeoGAF

[Diablos]

Oh, and if anyone desires more schadenfreude over this case, I recommend listening to David Rivkin's portions of today's Federalist Society teleforum about it.

"Not just a law anymore. Free-ranging license to improve and expand health care at all costs." Untouchable and "super statute that is beyond reach," he says.
Given that he's against the law yet admitting this so early into the podcast... that says a lot.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Yeah, I came around to 6-3 as well especially after reading what Kennedy said during oral argument.

really because that's not how i remember it

 

[Metaphoreus]

really because that's not how i remember it

Did Diablos send you a panicked PM the other night, too?

 

[Diablos]

really because that's not how i remember it

Remember what you want. This is a good day.

My best case scenario was 6-3 for, worst case 5-4 against.

I felt 50/50 about it, less confident in the past week or two because the timing discouraged me.

 

[Retromelon]

I enjoyed Scalia's dissent, but I wish it had made more of an affirmative case for his reading. Simply berating the majority opinion can only carry you so far.

EDIT:Ayy how do i hotlink picture lmao

 

[Aaron Strife]

Did Diablos send you a panicked PM the other night, too?

No he just showed up at my house

Remember what you want. This is a good day.

If you want to get specific this is how I remember it

 

[Diablos]

No he just showed up at my house


If you want to get specific this is how I remember it

Okay.

 

[ivysaur12]

Remember what you want. This is a good day.

My best case scenario was 6-3 for, worst case 5-4 against.

I felt 50/50 about it, less confident in the past week or two because the timing discouraged me.

Just a little less confident.

This is what you're hoping.

I think the subsidies are in real trouble now. Why on earth would they pick Friday? That just seems insane. For any reason. Kill the subsidies on Friday, legalize gay marriage on Monday.

RIP Obamacare

I do these things out of love.

 

[B-Dubs]

Did Diablos send you a panicked PM the other night, too?

I got a call in the middle of the night myself...

If you want to get specific this is how I remember it

LOL

 

[Diablos]

Just a little less confident.



I do these things out of love.

The entire thread was freaking out.

Meta: These guys from the Federalist Society are really sad!

 

[ivysaur12]

The entire thread was freaking out.

Yes and no. But hey! It's all fine.

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

Ugh, can't get in sleep mode because of anxiety about the SSM decision tomorrow, and it doesn't even affect me personally.

It's like being on the support crew for the 101st waiting for them to take off to d-day.

 

[benjipwns]

Ugh, can't get in sleep mode because of anxiety about the SSM decision tomorrow, and it doesn't even affect me personally.

It's like being on the support crew for the 101st waiting for them to take off to d-day.

Having correctly called the Obamacare case back in March, I will now correctly call the Obamarriage case.

6-3 for Obamarriage. 7-2 if Thomas was honest with himself.

Also, in a rare double-whammy decision the court finds polygamy constitutional.

 

[Retromelon]

Ugh, can't get in sleep mode because of anxiety about the SSM decision tomorrow, and it doesn't even affect me personally.

It's like being on the support crew for the 101st waiting for them to take off to d-day.

If you get too attached to these things the setbacks become crushing. "Although I am wounded, i am not slain; I shall rise and fight again"

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

Having correctly called the Obamacare case back in March, I will now correctly call the Obamarriage case.

6-3 for Obamarriage. 7-2 if Thomas was honest with himself.

Also, in a rare double-whammy decision the court finds polygamy constitutional.

Thanks, Benj, you're the nyquil shot for my soul.

As to the bolded, I actually don't understand why it isn't, particularly on religious grounds.

If you get too attached to these things the setbacks become crushing. "Although I am wounded, i am not slain; I shall rise and fight again"

Eh, I mean I won't be crushed if it goes the wrong way. Like I said, it doesn't affect me personally. I'll be sad that America failed to live up to its philosophical foundations, but if you're a true lover of this country you have to learn to accept it when the rock rolls back down the hill and you have to start pushing it back up again.

But that energy in the air, the winds of change creaking through the brush. Gets all my nerves firin'.

 

[Diablos]

Yes and no. But hey! It's all fine.

People like calling me out, it's like therapy or something. I don't know.

Obamacare on a Friday is bizarre to me and totally confusing. I'm scared it'll lose

Honestly makes me think that it will.

Friday is when you announce news that you want to get underplayed.

Yah that's my thinking as well. I'm getting really scared that their actually going to strike down the subsidies. Looks like I'm about to be uninsured.

Remember that "one day please conservatives, next day please liberals" pattern that the Roberts court seems to like for the ends of its terms?

My parents might be losing their plans soon.

You guys are scaring me about the ACA.

God, we'll be so fucked if it's knocked down.

Obamacare on a Friday is bizarre to me and totally confusing. I'm scared it'll lose

Honestly makes me think that it will.

Friday is when you announce news that you want to get underplayed.

Yah that's my thinking as well. I'm getting really scared that their actually going to strike down the subsidies. Looks like I'm about to be uninsured.

Remember that "one day please conservatives, next day please liberals" pattern that the Roberts court seems to like for the ends of its terms?

My parents might be losing their plans soon.

You guys are scaring me about the ACA.

God, we'll be so fucked if it's knocked down.

 

[benjipwns]

There was a case brought earlier this year into one of the federal courts in Michigan in which the minister is arguing that it violates the First Amendment to prohibit religious institutions from blessing both same-sex and multiple-person unions.

The relevant Michigan statute, though probably unenforced says:

If a person authorized to solemnize marriages knowingly joins any persons in marriage contrary to the provisions of this chapter, he or she shall forfeit for each offense a sum not exceeding $500.00.

http://www.carrickvsnyder.info/

Same-sex marriage is banned by constitutional amendment in Michigan, I assume the polygamy ban is just statutory though.

EDIT: Looking at the actual Michigan Constitution, I should say rather that marriage is defined as one man and one woman, not that same-sex marriage is banned.

It being a constitutional amendment is actually how I got three or four anti-gay/anti-gay-marriage people to vote against it when it was on the ballot though. Was able to convince them that elevating it and other issues to that level rather than a mere law was unfit for any constitution. Even Michigan's.

 

[ivysaur12]

I'm agnostic towards polygamy -- it's been an oppressive institution, but without that history, I don't have a technical issue with it. My questions are more legal: how would inheritance work? Custody? Divorce? Are children raised in a polyamorous environment okay? My gut on the last part is yes, but I'd like to see some data.

I also don't really think it'd be a wildly used relationship option so I don't really see any fundamental shift in the institution.

People like calling me out, it's like therapy or something. I don't know.

That's a nice wall of shame. Maybe I'm misremembering. Honestly, one of my biggest frustration with the left is the constant anxiety and thought that nothing is ever good enough. It's very hard for a win to be considered a win, and there's a pessimism and anxiety that seems ingrained within left-leaning people. I think I just happen to respond negatively towards it because I'm overly optimistic about a lot, to a fault.

 

[Aaron Strife]

As to the bolded, I actually don't understand why it isn't, particularly on religious grounds.

It might be hard/weird to implement for tax reasons.

 

[Chichikov]

EDIT:Ayy how do i hotlink picture lmao

p.s.

(quote to figure out what you did wrong ).

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

There was a case brought earlier this year into one of the federal courts in Michigan in which the minister is arguing that it violates the First Amendment to prohibit religious institutions from blessing both same-sex and multiple-person unions.

The relevant Michigan statute, though probably unenforced says:

http://www.carrickvsnyder.info/

Same-sex marriage is banned by constitutional amendment in Michigan, I assume the polygamy ban is just statutory though.

EDIT: Looking at the actual Michigan Constitution, I should say rather than marriage is defined as one man and one woman, not that same-sex marriage is banned.

It being a constitutional amendment is actually how I got three or four anti-gay/anti-gay-marriage people to vote against it when it was on the ballot though. Was able to convince them that elevating it and other issues to that level rather than a mere law was unfit for any constitution. Even Michigan's.

Ah, clicked quote before your edit, but I was gonna say lol performing the ceremony is just a civil offense? Not even a misdemeanor?

 

[ivysaur12]

EDIT: Looking at the actual Michigan Constitution, I should say rather that marriage is defined as one man and one woman, not that same-sex marriage is banned.

There's an annoying rhetorical argument that because these bans don't actually mention gay marriage or homosexuality, they can't actually be targeting gay couples, but rather just defining marriage for what it is. I'm very thankful that hasn't taken hold.

 

[benjipwns]

Are children raised in a polyamorous environment okay? My gut on the last part is yes

I think more importantly is whether or not it being illegal/suspect/etc. promotes this. Like the drug war promotes third-party violence by banning avenues of legal recourse for dispute resolution.

Cults/high fundamentalism have similar issues inherently. Which is one reason Westboro being so public isn't all a bad thing.

There's an annoying rhetorical argument that because these bans don't actually mention gay marriage or homosexuality, they can't actually be targeting gay couples, but rather just defining marriage for what it is. I'm very thankful that hasn't taken hold.

It has...in certain circles.

For the post I just wanted to be exacting as to the constitutional language*, since that wording applies it to polygamy too.

*For Meta's safety, of course.

 

[Oblivion]

I agree with Metapod and Scalia. Obviously Obama and the Dems wanted to limit subsidies to the states. Why do you think they're called Statists?

 

[ivysaur12]

I think more importantly is whether or not it being illegal/suspect/etc. promotes this. Like the drug war promotes third-party violence by banning avenues of legal recourse for dispute resolution.

Cults/high fundamentalism have similar issues inherently. Which is one reason Westboro being so public isn't all a bad thing.

Yeah. I have much less of an issue with a San Fransisco-style polyamorous relationship than I do with a Sister Wives-esque one, and wonder what resources those women have.

Also lol at the leading polyamory group in America being called Love More.

It has...in certain circles.

For the post I just wanted to be exacting as to the constitutional language*, since that wording applies it to polygamy too.

*For Meta's safety, of course.

I was more speaking to a larger legal consensus. But of course. For Meta.

 

[Retromelon]

I read carolyn jessops book while i was cutting high school in the library about her experience in a polygamous relationship with a high up flds member and it was disastrous. Wives constantly backstabbing each other for the male's favor. I don't want to restrict anyone from what they want to do if they aren't hurting anyone but polygamy seems to often breed jealosy, hatred and little else.

 

[Oblivion]

“At the same time, crocodile tears are flooding our nation’s capital today over the Supreme Court’s decision to illegally rewrite Obamacare, which has been a disaster since its inception.

https://www.tedcruz.org/news/cruz-a...dum-on-repealing-obamacare-should-step-aside/

Guh?

 

[KingK]

I'm agnostic towards polygamy -- it's been an oppressive institution, but without that history, I don't have a technical issue with it. My questions are more legal: how would inheritance work? Custody? Divorce? Are children raised in a polyamorous environment okay? My gut on the last part is yes, but I'd like to see some data.

I also don't really think it'd be a wildly used relationship option so I don't really see any fundamental shift in the institution.

That's my stance on the issue as well. The historical misogyny gives me pause, but i have no ideological opposition to polygamy. I actually work with a bi woman who has a husband and a long term girlfriend in some sort of polygamous relationship. And it's apparently an open relationship for all parties, so on occasion she's also had another boyfriend.

 

[ivysaur12]

I read carolyn jessops book while i was cutting high school in the library about her experience in a polygamous relationship with a high up flds member and it was disastrous. Wives constantly backstabbing each other for the male's favor. I don't want to restrict anyone from what they want to do if they aren't hurting anyone but polygamy seems to often breed jealosy, hatred and little else.

I think that's a different kind of relationship than other sorts of polyamorous relationships that I know people are/have been in (one of my old coworkers used to be a professional dominatrix/burlesque dancer/polyamorous enthusiast for 20 years and then decided to write a script and lo and behold became a TV writer?). One of my problems with polyamory has always been the more cult-esque component of its history that still seems persistent in certain areas.

 

[ivysaur12]

Yes, but you can't allow for one without also allowing for the other.

Exactly.

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

https://www.tedcruz.org/news/cruz-a...dum-on-repealing-obamacare-should-step-aside/

Guh?

Tried that in 2012.

Didn't work in 2012.

Not for the Presidency, anyway.

 

[Jooney]

I argued as much maybe even before SCOTUS took the case up.

Now I'm thoroughly convinced the liberals are the 4 who asked to hear the case. Not just because it's 6-3, but how definite the ruling was by Roberts. They wanted to harm Scalia's legal theories and they accomplished that today.

Scalia believes the words only matter in the most strictest of ways, even if a mistake. The Liberals believe intent and context matters to a more expanded way than Scalia.

This wasn't just a win for Obama and the law, it was a win for those of us who believe such things should matter when interpreting law. Scalia lost big time today.

That's the big takeaway from all this to me, too. If there's an ambiguity in the statute, the reading can't be to take an interpretation that is diametrically opposed to the intent of the statue as passed by Congress. Given the overwhelming context affirming the government's position as to the interpretation of the bill (including the lack of debate on state vs. federal exchanges during the bills passing; the lack of variable numbers of exchanges being factored into the CBO scoring analysis; and that State governors responsible for State exchange implementation didn't take King's interpretation during the health care rollout) it would have been a disingenuous decision if it went the other way.

The Big Chief said it best himself:

“It is implausible that Congress meant the Act to operate in this manner. See National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U. S. ___, ___ (2012) (SCALIA, KENNEDY, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., dissenting) (slip op., at 60) (“Without the federal subsidies … the exchanges would not operate as Congress intended and may not operate at all.”).

I don't know what's worse: politicians who don't read the bill they're passing; or justices who don't read the statue they're ruling on.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Ugh, can't get in sleep mode because of anxiety about the SSM decision tomorrow, and it doesn't even affect me personally.

It's like being on the support crew for the 101st waiting for them to take off to d-day.

It's not nearly that dire. In fact it's more like being Floyd Mayweather's towel guy. Victory is for certain breh. Do your part and sit back and watch the schadenfreude aftermath.

 

[Diablos]

I really hope Scalia steps down now.

 

[benjipwns]

One of my problems with polyamory has always been the more cult-esque component of its history that still seems persistent in certain areas.

I think this is key though in terms of our understanding of its practice.

As polyamory has transitioned from the norm to taboo to illegal it has become more the purview of cults/fundamentalists. These people have other ideological, philosophical and moral reasons to their maintaining of these relationships with or without abuse than what they might find acceptable in the broader liberal culture outside.

In other words, you aren't getting "normal" people openly in these relationships in the first place. In that way, it is somewhat comparable to homosexuality's "coming out of the closet" after they both got shoved in it at about the same time some centuries back.

 

[Retromelon]

I really hope Scalia steps down now.

No way he would give barack the satisfaction.

 

[Metaphoreus]

I agree with Metapod and Scalia. Obviously Obama and the Dems wanted to limit subsidies to the states. Why do you think they're called Statists?

And here I thought it would take multiple superlong posts to make the point.

*For Meta's safety, of course.

But of course. For Meta.

As if I care enough about Michigan or whatever fake state you all are talking about to go read their Constitution or Charter or whatever.

 

[ivysaur12]

I think this is key though in terms of our understanding of its practice.

As polyamory has transitioned from the norm to taboo to illegal it has become more the purview of cults/fundamentalists. These people have other ideological, philosophical and moral reasons to their maintaining of these relationships with or without abuse than what they might find acceptable in the broader liberal culture outside.

In other words, you aren't getting "normal" people openly in these relationships in the first place. In that way, it is somewhat comparable to homosexuality's "coming out of the closet" after they both got shoved in it at about the same time some centuries back.

Non-monogamy seems natural for many people, and I think there are many heterosexual couples with issues who would be otherwise happy if they had some rules on the openness of their relationships.

It's something I need to think more about, for sure.

 

[benjipwns]

The more important thing is that we tear down all symbols of the scum of the rebel alliance:
http://barbwire.com/2015/06/25/0900-rebel-flag-removal-okay-rainbow-flags-are-next/

As we near the celebration of the birth of America, let’s extend respect to all our citizens, including faithful Christians.

Recognizing that slavery is an inhumane act of discrimination, and that the confederate flag may serve as a painful symbol of that tragic era of American history, our leaders should also admit that the promotion of homosexuality is creating a major rift in the fabric of our nation.

We are seeing an unjustified war against the 51 million Americans who voted for man/woman marriage on state ballots. But the reality of marriage remains as elemental as the rising of the sun each day.

Same sex relationships will never be marriage, regardless of what any court decides. The identity and behavior of homosexuality can never be the basis of an authentic union between two people.

Still, a rebel flag flies on some government buildings and some of our embassies as a symbol of hatred. Sexual morality and authentic marriage are despised by those who wave the rainbow flag, which is even waved in front of schoolchildren as an illegitimate banner of “civil rights,” although it’s the opposite. It’s the logo of a war being waged against virtue, against the reality of male/female biology and against the witness of Jesus Christ.

It’s time to lower the rainbow flag everywhere. God created the rainbow as a sign of hope (Genesis 9:12-17). But homosexual political operatives have captured this symbol as an unauthorized expression of “pride.” Well, rainbows accompanying this depravity are as unfitting as the term “gay,” and it’s time for Christians to demand recognition of the offense involved and a permanent retraction.

Proud homosexuals don’t love God. They take pride in disobedience. Therefore, these rebels have no right to the rainbow, period.

So, let’s demand that no more rainbow flags fly above our federal agencies. No more hateful colors on our embassies, or on the Pentagon website. And it’s time for retailers with a conscience to stop selling rainbow- adorned “gay” merchandise and show respect and sensitivity to the outcry of concerned families and parents.

Walmart, for instance, sells a wide array of rainbow-decorated merchandise specifically supporting “gay” political interests. The retail giant even sells books for children that feature themes of homosexual indoctrination. The corporation has become a big supporter of the “LGBT” agenda and is even a “platinum sponsor” of the New York City homosexual pride parade.

Walmart, Ebay, Amazon and others have decided to discontinue sales of confederate flag merchandise. Shouldn’t the same apply to rainbow-adorned “LGBT” items?

Our federal agencies don’t fly a confederate flag or the flag of any other country. Yet they hoist rainbow flags regularly under the Obama administration, especially during the “pride” month of June.

If the confederate flag truly causes pain to some black Americans, well, understood. Where’s the understanding for Christian Americans who are victims of the newly empowered bigotry of “gay” activists? The lost jobs, the closed businesses, the ruined reputations, the children corrupted?

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

The more important thing is that we tear down all symbols of the scum of the rebel alliance:
http://barbwire.com/2015/06/25/0900-rebel-flag-removal-okay-rainbow-flags-are-next/

I swear I read an almost-the-same diatribe somewhere today but it was much more harshly worded.

And obligatory: won't somebody think of the children?!

 

[ivysaur12]

She's right. The rainbow flag is pretty tacky.

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

She's right. The rainbow flag is pretty tacky.

I've always assumed the campiness was tongue-in-cheek.

 

[ivysaur12]

I've always assumed the campiness was tongue-in-cheek.

Ugh, of course it is. Thanks, Broadway gays!!!!

 

[Retromelon]

Wow, because christians being forced to tolerate gay equality is equivalent to slavery. The persecution complex and lack of awareness of some first world white people boggles the mind

 

[benjipwns]

Ugh, of course it is. Thanks, Broadway gays!!!!

SHE WARNED YOU ABOUT THE RUINED REPUTATIONS

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

Wow, because christians being forced to tolerate gay equality is equivalent to slavery. The persecution complex and lack of awareness of some first world white people boggles the mind

Hey now, you don't have to be a white christian to have a persecution complex about your sexual orientation intolerance.

Don't make me break out the Proposition 8 voting demographics.

Or, better yet:

While looking for that I noticed the first autofill return in google images was "Ben Carson wife" so I searched that. It was not highly search for the reason I was hoping...

 

[Retromelon]

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

Wait! Wait! Wait! Hold everything.

Bob Beckel is a liberal?

Granted I never watched The Five, but I've only heard of him for being racially insensitive on Fox News.

Also, he's fired. Limbaughitis.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/06/fox-news-drops-bob-beckel-209504.html?hp=r4_3

 

[benjipwns]

He's the Mondale campaign manager who stole "where's the beef?" from Wendy's!

He also has an amazing past of drug use and related stories. Cocaine and alcohol I think.

 

[Retromelon]

I know this is off topic but i cant make threads
I just heard rustling near the side of my room and i have an uncontrollable fear of insects and mice
I think im going to have a mental breakdown