Another Federal Appeals Court Strikes Down DOMA

[Seawytch]

And yet gun ownership is licensed is it not?

Not in my state.

Really? No background check, nothin'? You can just pick one up at 7-11?

 

[bripat9643]

And yet gun ownership is licensed is it not?

Not in my state.

Really? No background check, nothin'? You can just pick one up at 7-11?

A background check is not a license. Requiring a license simply to own a gun is unconstitutional.

 

[OODA_Loop]

And yet gun ownership is licensed is it not?

Not in my state.

Really? No background check, nothin'? You can just pick one up at 7-11?

NCIC and 4473. The results of which are kept at the licensed seller.

And no license.

 

[Seawytch]

The government already decides who can't marry it is nothing new. The equal protection part should come in only if two people of the opposite sex were denied marriage. But that is the case and has been for as long as there has been a marriage LICENCE. Rights are not LICENCED.

And yet gun ownership is licensed is it not? The SCOTUS has declared civil marriage a fundamental right on no less than three occasions.

Really? Name them.

Loving v Virginia - Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival. To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.

Zablocki v Wisconsin - Since our past decisions make clear that the right to marry is of fundamental importance, and since the classification at issue here significantly interferes with the exercise of that right, we believe that "critical examination" of the state interests advanced in support of the classification is required.

Turner v Safley - The right to marry is mentioned over a dozen times

 

[bripat9643]

Except Judge Jacobs could hardly be called a liberal. The guy was originally appointed to the 2nd Circuit by Daddy Bush. Of course, by today's nutty standards GW was a liberal.

Of course, as has already been explained, being appointed by Bush isn't proof that a judge is conservative. Bush wasn't a conservative himself.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The "Defense of Marriage Act" does two things that are unconstitutional:
1. The federal government judged without constitutional authority that only opposing genders could marry.
2. As a product of that judgement that same gender couples did not have equal rights under the law.

My biggest problem with DOMA is that if the government gets to choose who we marry are they also going to decide who can have children? What other powers will the feds assume related to this? Maybe they can save SS by deciding who gets treatment and for what illnesses. Then they can decide if a child born with a devistating illness or sub-par mental faculties should live.
These decisions should be completely out of the scope of governmental power. People have always decided for themselves who they want to spend their lives with. Even before marriage existed partnerships formed or were arranged by parents but never by governments. Once a person reached the "age of consent" they were allowed to choose who they loved. Before the written languages they chose who they would marry and for how long.
The only interest that government has is where the taxes come from and who receives them when one of the partners die.
No one is mandating that religious practitioners must perform marriages that are beyond the scope of their belief system, though it would surprise most to know that a few religions actually have used ceremonies for same gender marriages, no one requires that they perform them. There are enough ministers that will perform the ceremony for same gender couples when those people want to make a lifetime commitment to each other.
All the same gender couples want are the same rights as other spouses have under current laws.
They threaten no one. They just want the same loving relationship with the same rights that spouses accross the USA are supposed to have.

The government already decides who can't marry it is nothing new. The equal protection part should come in only if two people of the opposite sex were denied marriage. But that is the case and has been for as long as there has been a marriage LICENCE. Rights are not LICENCED.

True, however government must apply those criteria as to who may and may not marry equally to all persons, it may not single out and exclude a particular class of persons, in this case same-sex couples.

Our civil rights are not absolute, government can place restrictions on the exercising of those rights, including a license to own a gun or registering to vote; but again, those restrictions must be consistent, applied to everyone equally, be based on a justifiable rational basis, and not motivated on the part of government by animus – laws prohibiting same-sex couples to marry fail to meet Constitutional muster on all of the above requirements.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Romney will not pursue DOMA or DADT: he is simply telling the far right what they want to hear.

 

[Inthemiddle]

The government already decides who can't marry it is nothing new. The equal protection part should come in only if two people of the opposite sex were denied marriage. But that is the case and has been for as long as there has been a marriage LICENCE. Rights are not LICENCED.

Guess you never heard of a handgun permit.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Not in my state.

Really? No background check, nothin'? You can just pick one up at 7-11?

NCIC and 4473. The results of which are kept at the licensed seller.

And no license.

Unlike voting and marriage, the right to self-defense is not considered a fundamental right; and unlike voting and marriage, laws restricting gun ownership are subject to a lesser standard of judicial review, usually rational basis or intermediate scrutiny.

Therefore laws requiring background checks, waiting periods, and licenses have been upheld as Constitutional.

In essence, jurisdictions may place any manner of restrictions on gun ownership save that of an outright ban.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Do homosexuals have a family tree? Nope, not one that extends past them.

Marriage exists because of the facts of biology

Actually, biology tells us to go forth and be fruitful with as many partners as we can convince.

 

[Seawytch]

Except Judge Jacobs could hardly be called a liberal. The guy was originally appointed to the 2nd Circuit by Daddy Bush. Of course, by today's nutty standards GW was a liberal.

Of course, as has already been explained, being appointed by Bush isn't proof that a judge is conservative. Bush wasn't a conservative himself.

Case in point...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Romney will not pursue DOMA or DADT: he is simply telling the far right what they want to hear.

The only things Romney will be pursuing is golf games and speaking gigs as a private citizen after November 6th.

 

[Seawytch]

Do homosexuals have a family tree? Nope, not one that extends past them.

Marriage exists because of the facts of biology

Actually, biology tells us to go forth and be fruitful with as many partners as we can convince.

I don't think Bri is all that familiar with biology. Apparently he thinks that when you get your "gay card" your eggs or sperm dry up. I can assure him that isn't the case.

My family tree is going on because of me. My married brother and his wife have chosen not to have children. If I hadn't, our family tree would have ended with my brother and I since my uncle also chose not to have children.

I also procreated with multiple partners since, after I had our two children (the children of my 17 year lesbian partner and I), I went on to have three more children for another couple.

I was very fruitful and very multiplyey.

 

[Seawytch]

Romney will not pursue DOMA or DADT: he is simply telling the far right what they want to hear.

The only things Romney will be pursuing is golf games and speaking gigs as a private citizen after November 6th.

And Ann said he won't ever run again. This will be the last we hear of Willard.

 

[OODA_Loop]

I also procreated with multiple partners since, after I had our two children (the children of my 17 year lesbian partner and I), I went on to have three more children for another couple.

Were y'all the 10 people @ Fluke's rally ?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

There's no such thing as a homosexual family. Either you or your partner has no biological relationship to 'your' child. You are no more a family than if I started shacking up with a girlfriend who had a child out of wedlock.

Interesting. You've just said all those marriages where a man is married to a woman with a child by another man are not real families.


.

Do homosexuals have a family tree? Nope, not one that extends past them. Why should anyone dispute the definition of "family" as genealogists define it?

Marriage exists because of the facts of biology, and the oxymoron called "homosexual marriage" will never get around those.

Of course homosexuals have a ‘family tree,’ they have families, children, ancestors, and descendants.

Marriage exists to enact a life-long contract between two persons committed to one another, having nothing to do with biology, as some opposite-sex couples are unable to have children, or elect to have none.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Really? Name them.

Loving v Virginia

Skinner v Oklahoma

Zablocki v. Redhail

Griswold v Connecticut

Cleburne v Cleburne

Cleveland Board of Education v LaFleur

 

[JakeStarkey]

Keep up the mantra, lefties, keep up the mantra.

Romney will not pursue DOMA or DADT: he is simply telling the far right what they want to hear.

The only things Romney will be pursuing is golf games and speaking gigs as a private citizen after November 6th.

And Ann said he won't ever run again. This will be the last we hear of Willard.

 

[rightwinger]

DOMA is bad legislation based on hate

Long overdue for it to be ruled unconstitutional

 

[bripat9643]

I also procreated with multiple partners since, after I had our two children (the children of my 17 year lesbian partner and I), I went on to have three more children for another couple.

Were y'all the 10 people @ Fluke's rally ?

Seawytch says she had children with "other couples." Apparently she believes procreation requires 3 people, and she has the gal to tell me I don't understand biology!

She also says she had a child with her lesbian partner. I'd like her to explain how that works. What part did her partner play in the act of conception?

These are the kind of nutburgers who try to tell us that marriage has nothing to do with procreation.