Support NeoGAF

[Paskil]

Ruling is stayed, pending appeal.

Posting from mobile so no quotes.

http://www.ksfy.com/home/headlines/...-marriage-ban-288311611.html?device=phone&c=y

Here's the ruling.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/252429277/4-14-cv-04081-50

 

[Mesoian]

Gilmoregirlsshimmy.gif

 

[mre]

Monumental for the South Dakota homosexual population.

 

[kmax]

 

[kirblar]

Congratulations!

Condolences on living in South Dakota.

 

[cirrhosis]

penny dance gif

 

[esms]

I await the updated map.

 

[Yaphett Kotto]

Slowly getting there.

Can't wait for Deep South states to start the process.

 

[Einbroch]

I'm so happy for the six of you!

 

[TacticalFox88]

To think. A few years ago I thought it'd be till 2020 till we had full nationwide gay marriage.

 

[Sobriquet]

 

[CreepingFear]

I look forward to the whining from Penny haters. I feed off their anger.

 

[Orbis Tabula]

With the incredible momentum that's been building through last year, I wonder if 2015 will be the year this issue is finally put to bed. I hope so. One would think Obama would be more invested in that, seeing as it would be a great feather in his cap.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

So instead of making gay marriage constitutional, you...ban gay marriage, then....rule the ban to be unconstitutional? I don't get your system US, it seems odd.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Monumental for the South Dakota homosexual population.

Also known as Dave.

 

[ivysaur12]

Stayed pending appeal.

Congrats to all the farming lesbians of South Dakota!!

Also known as Dave.

Yes. And Dave.

 

[Borgnine]

It's too bad South Dakota's two homosexual residents don't even like eachother.

 

[LegendofLex]

So instead of making gay marriage constitutional

As far as I know, marriage isn't mentioned in the US Constitution.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

As far as I know, marriage isn't mentioned in the US Constitution.

You can add stuff though, right?

 

[ivysaur12]

You can add stuff though, right?

It's virtually impossible in 2015 to do so.

 

[davepoobond]

So instead of making gay marriage constitutional, you...ban gay marriage, then....rule the ban to be unconstitutional? I don't get your system US, it seems odd.

States rights include everything but what is allowed/disallowed by the federal constitution.

It is technically within a states right to pass anything that it wants, but whether or not it sticks around is if it holds up in court.

That's a major facet of the government and usually proves to be a better thing than a worse thing because it gives power to the states to counterbalance the federal govenment.

But in this case you make gay marriage legal by making a ban illegal. So it's a good thing in the end even though the initial thing was bad

 

[8 X 11 Printer Paper]

So instead of making gay marriage constitutional, you...ban gay marriage, then....rule the ban to be unconstitutional? I don't get your system US, it seems odd.

Gay Marriage would never, ever pass the Senate and House (Not for a few decades atleast). From 1998 to 2012 most of the states (mostly the northeast) banned gay marriage, but with SCOTUS striking down DOMA it has allowed judges to not only get rid of the ban's but make it legal.

 

[n00bsauce87]

When I see these threads, I only come for this gif.

 

[esms]

You can add stuff though, right?

Marriage is one of those weird things here in America. It's technically a religious ceremony, but it garners benefits from the state. Bearing that in mind, it would be pretty goddamn impossible to get something like a "Marriage Rights Amendment" passed in today's political climate.

 

[Andrew J.]

So instead of making gay marriage constitutional, you...ban gay marriage, then....rule the ban to be unconstitutional? I don't get your system US, it seems odd.

It's called "federalism", and it can be a little weird.

 

[Tecl0n]

I look forward to the whining from Penny haters. I feed off their anger.

How can someone hate penny.

 

[cajunator]

Can someone explain what this gif means? Where is it from?

 

[CDX]

With the incredible momentum that's been building through last year, I wonder if 2015 will be the year this issue is finally put to bed. I hope so. One would think Obama would be more invested in that, seeing as it would be a great feather in his cap.

June

It'll be legal nationwide by the end of June.

It's almost certain the Supreme Court will take on one of the cases ruling against same sex marriage from the 6th Circuit, and overturn it, ruling in favor of same sex marriage and making it legal in all 50 states in June.

 

[LegendofLex]

You can add stuff though, right?

Yes, but in the US affairs that aren't directly addressed by the Constitution are left to the individual states.

To amend the Constitution requires two-thirds of both houses of Congress (or two-thirds of the states) to agree to put the amendment up for ratification. And if you can get that done, then three-fourths of the states need to ratify the amendment.

Since until recently most of the states had legislation on the books banning gay marriage, ain't no one gonna push that kind of amendment through. Better off letting the courts use existing equal protection guarantees in the Constitution (and recently established precedents prohibiting legal discrimination against gay couples) to strike down gay marriage bans.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

States rights include everything but what is allowed/disallowed by the federal constitution.

It is technically within a states right to pass anything that it wants, but whether or not it sticks around is if it holds up in court.

That's a major facet of the government and usually proves to be a better thing than a worse thing because it gives power to the states to counterbalance the federal govenment.

But in this case you make gay marriage legal by making a ban illegal. So it's a good thing in the end even though the initial thing was bad

Thanks for the explanation. I guess it sort of makes sense, but it just feels like the kind of thing that should be done centrally. Is there any chance of a federal law coming in at the end of all this? Like, "Welp, it's legal in every state now anyway, might as well!"?

Gay Marriage would never, ever pass the Senate and House (Not for a few decades atleast). From 1998 to 2012 most of the states (mostly the northeast) banned gay marriage, but with SCOTUS striking down DOMA it has allowed judges to not only get rid of the ban's but make it legal.

See this phrase just sounds odd to me too, and it's possibly why I find this whole system confusing. I didn't think it was a judge's job to make laws exactly. Just apply the ones you've got.

Anyway, sorry if I'm clogging up this good news thread with my confusion. And congrats to any South Dakotans who want to get hitched!

 

[Link]

Map:

 

[Einbroch]

As an Indianan, I am still shocked when I see that image.

 

[CDX]

Map:

Before anyone asks.

 

[IDKAboutThat]

Awwww shit
Next step: Get a boyfriend
And move from GA to South Dakota

 

[LegendofLex]

Thanks for the explanation. I guess it sort of makes sense, but it just feels like the kind of thing that should be done centrally. Is there any chance of a federal law coming in at the end of all this? Like, "Welp, it's legal in every state now anyway, might as well!"?

At "the end of all this," we'll likely have a legal precedent established by the courts that definitively establishes gay marriage (and gay couples) as protected.

See this phrase just sounds odd to me too, and it's possibly why I find this whole system confusing. I didn't think it was a judge's job to make laws exactly. Just apply the ones you've got.

It's not the judges' job to "make laws." It's their job to interpret laws and determine whether laws stand up under constitutional scrutiny.

 

[Dicer]

I look forward to the whining from Penny haters. I feed off their anger.

I have no hate for the character, just hate how that became the defacto .gif when devilwavingchainsaw.gif is superior.

OT: Awesome news, unified gay marriage across the USA this year please.

 

[Wilsongt]

Map:

Lol @ that strip of red. They are shaking in their bigoted boots that the gays are gonna take over.

 

[esms]

Map:

So, out of the three blocking the transcontinental gayway, which one do you think will fall first?

Ohio?
Kentucky?
Tennessee?

Taking all bets.

 

[Link]

Lol @ that strip of red. They are shaking in their bigoted boots that the gays are gonna take over.

They're also ruining anyone's plans for a same-sex marriage cross-country tour.

EDIT - Out of the choices, I'd guess Ohio.

 

[Anoregon]

Man that map is starting to look pretty dope.

Once the 50th state goes, it has to transform from all blue to fabulous rainbow collage.

 

[Ramza]

Map:

So close to that coast to coast gay marriage train

So, out of the three blocking the transcontinental gayway, which one do you think will fall first?

Ohio?
Kentucky?
Tennessee?

Taking all bets.

Ohio. Ain't even a contest

 

[Wilsongt]

They're also ruining anyone's plans for a same-sex marriage cross-country tour.

5th circuit ruining the Rainbow Express.

 

[Escape Goat]

So, out of the three blocking the transcontinental gayway, which one do you think will fall first?

Ohio?
Kentucky?
Tennessee?

Taking all bets.

Do any of them having court challenges in the system?

 

[Damaniel]

So instead of making gay marriage constitutional, you...ban gay marriage, then....rule the ban to be unconstitutional? I don't get your system US, it seems odd.

Getting a constitutional amendment passed in America is really, really hard (by design). Any amendment requires passage by 2/3 of both the House and Senate, and then must be ratified by 3/4 of the states. (There's an alternate method involving getting 2/3 of the states to call for a constitutional convention, but I'm not sure that's ever been done). As such, we haven't seen a new amendment passed in ~40 years (the one that dropped the voting age to 18), unless you count the 27th, which was passed back in the 1780s but not ratified until the early 90s.

On top of that, constitutional amendments have historically been about explicitly enumerating rights that we generally already had, or expanding those rights to people who previously didn't have them (like the voting amendment). We only have one major example of historical precedent in terms of taking rights away - the 18th Amendment, which was the start of Prohibition. We also have only one major example of historical precedent when it comes to repealing a previously approved amendment - the 21st Amendment, which ended Prohibition. Americans generally don't like changes to the Constitution that take rights away, and gay marriage isn't all that much different. At a minimum, you'd never get 37 states to agree to ban it via amendment.

Note that states have their own constitutions, and the process for amending those is usually much less complicated - in some cases, it can be done by popular vote. Many states, especially those in the South, just love to take away rights via their constitutions.

 

[smokeandmirrors]

Lol @ that strip of red. They are shaking in their bigoted boots that the gays are gonna take over.

THE GAYS ARE COMING FROM THE EAST AND THE WEST.

It's like the allies and the soviet union during wwII. they'll eventually meet in the middle and divide the capital amongst themselves as some kind of super gay paradise.

 

[Escape Goat]

THE GAYS ARE COMING FROM THE EAST AND THE WEST.

It's like the allies and the soviet union during wwII. they'll eventually meet in the middle and divide the capital amongst themselves as some kind of super gay paradise.

Their dreams of a nationwide chain of boutique bed and breakfasts is nearly a reality.

 

[IDKAboutThat]

So instead of making gay marriage constitutional, you...ban gay marriage, then....rule the ban to be unconstitutional? I don't get your system US, it seems odd.

It's all integral to the Gay Agenda.
This way, we can make straight marriage unconstitutional with a well-timed counter hit, and soon everyone in America is gay married. It's what the FGC calls "yomi."

 

[Stumpokapow]

It's virtually impossible in 2015 to do so.

Look, it only took 203 years to ratify the 27th amendment. If gays were just willing to wait until 2218 to get married we'd have no trouble solving this problem through constitutional amendments, the way God intended it.

 

[User 479360]

This is good news. All same sex marriage bans are wrong and 'unconstitutional' as far as I'm concerned. People should be able to marry regardless of their sexual orientations.

 

[DuffDry]

Georgia really is gonna be the last state isn't it? Damn shame to live here sometimes.


Sure, lets let the state vote on whether gay people can get married, but medical marijuana? No sir, can't handle that shit.