Down goes DOMA!!

[Political Junky]

In CA same sex marriage effective immediately.
Kamala Harris just married the two women complainants, in the Supreme Court, in SF, and the two men will wed in LA tonight.

 

[Katzndogz]

This isn't at all a bad thing. This will serve to deepen and widen already present fissures making the eventual break up of the country that much closer. In the great scheme of things this is a small issue. Every little bit helps. Gays can stay in West Hollywood where they belong. It's not like people are going to treat them any better today than they did last week.

 

[rightwinger]

This isn't at all a bad thing. This will serve to deepen and widen already present fissures making the eventual break up of the country that much closer. In the great scheme of things this is a small issue. Every little bit helps. Gays can stay in West Hollywood where they belong. It's not like people are going to treat them any better today than they did last week.

Times change......the haters either die off or are chased into the shadows

 

[Trajan]

Both are examples of bigotry. They are different forms of bigotry, but still bigotry...a desire to discriminate against a group of people.

Sometimes the language takes easily similar forms, however...

Same-sex or “inter-racial” marriage? Take the quiz.

desire? I see. thats uhm , pretty messed up.


so, to be clear as I have asked this several times and have received what appears to be the same answer 3(?) times- if one is against or don't believe in racial inter marriage they are a bigot, if they are against or don't believe in gay marriage, they are a bigot......? Period?

There’s no such thing as ‘gay marriage,’ there’s only marriage law as written by a given state, so not believing in it makes sense. Same-sex couples marry in accordance with the same law as do opposite-sex couples. That’s also why acknowledging same-sex couples’ equal protection rights in no way ‘redefines’ marriage, as the law remains exactly the same.

The Equal Protection Clause requires the states to allow all persons access to a given state’s laws, including same-sex couples access to marriage law.

One might disagree with how the Equal Protection Clause is interpreted, but that won’t work because there’s no rational basis to justify rejecting 14th Amendment jurisprudence. Indeed, the courts have held that opposition to same-sex couples accessing marriage law is predicated solely on animus towards homosexuals, failing to realize a legitimate legislative end.

Given there’s no rational, objective reason to oppose same-sex couples access to marriage law, it’s difficult to come to any other conclusion than that of being motivated by bigotry.

Thank you Clayton, thats well stated I think and exactly what I was looking for.

I never had issue with gay rights- enforcing DNR's, insurance claims, wills, taxes, the whole kaboddle, thats why I started italicizing marriage and started mentioning rights, to me, theres a difference. And that is why I kept asking for a clarification and demonstration as to how racial components as in mixed marriages mattered in this context, I believe there is bigotry if opposed, I believe there is bigotry if one is opposed to gay rights, but marriage? I don't think so.

'Marriage'? Thats a bridge to far me right now, I would if I had my druthers rather it be 'Unions' or 'A Union'...I have an affinity for the traditionalist word/term 'Marriage'....everything I have read of it, related too, took part in, watched, evolution, biology, and though a heavily lapsed roman catholic I guess theres some religious apprehension too, not a lot but I have to account for it being part of me, ( and no I don't think its a 'sin'), I see matrimony as in 'Marriage', a procreational bond and commitment with all that follows as its strongest and best definition, that is if I were to define it.

I already thanked someone soon there after on this thread ( or the other on this) for stating that the court got it right, they did.

They got both parts right, the Cali. gov. did not defend prop 8, thats their job and though I think that their job is not to pick and choose what laws they defend, there was no legal standing brought that the court should recognize and, though it means that gay 'marriage' goes forward *shrugs* thats the vagaries of the law, and, the last word. Life will go on.

*****

As a general question for anyone, is my feeling on Marriage a bigoted stance?

 

[EriktheRed]

So hazl when are you marrying your boyfriend

Don't recall hazl ever saying he was gay.

 

[Seawytch]

desire? I see. thats uhm , pretty messed up.


so, to be clear as I have asked this several times and have received what appears to be the same answer 3(?) times- if one is against or don't believe in racial inter marriage they are a bigot, if they are against or don't believe in gay marriage, they are a bigot......? Period?

I gave you an example of when you wouldn't be a bigot...if you opposed marriage itself, otherwise yes.

marriage as in the governments involvement, is that correct? Not simply gay marriage, vs, say gay rights?

Correct. If you oppose only the institute of "government marriage" (and always have, not just since the gays wanted in the pool), then you are not a bigot. It helps the individual's case considerably if they are not themselves legally married though.

 

[Seawytch]

This isn't at all a bad thing. This will serve to deepen and widen already present fissures making the eventual break up of the country that much closer. In the great scheme of things this is a small issue. Every little bit helps. Gays can stay in West Hollywood where they belong. It's not like people are going to treat them any better today than they did last week.

Where does vitriolic hate like yours come from?

 

[Dot Com]

This isn't at all a bad thing. This will serve to deepen and widen already present fissures making the eventual break up of the country that much closer. In the great scheme of things this is a small issue. Every little bit helps. Gays can stay in West Hollywood where they belong. It's not like people are going to treat them any better today than they did last week.

oh for fuck's sake Were you a drama major at Regent U? Hyperbole is a fine art to rw'ers The country will progress in spite of your theatrics missy.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

This isn't at all a bad thing. This will serve to deepen and widen already present fissures making the eventual break up of the country that much closer. In the great scheme of things this is a small issue. Every little bit helps. Gays can stay in West Hollywood where they belong. It's not like people are going to treat them any better today than they did last week.

Where does vitriolic hate like yours come from?

Fear.

 

[Vandalshandle]

"'Marriage'? Thats a bridge to far me right now, I would if I had my druthers rather it be 'Unions' or 'A Union'...I have an affinity for the traditionalist word/term 'Marriage'....everything I have read of it, related too, took part in, watched, evolution, biology, and though a heavily lapsed roman catholic I guess theres some religious apprehension too, not a lot but I have to account for it being part of me, ( and no I don't think its a 'sin'), I see matrimony as in 'Marriage', a procreational bond and commitment with all that follows as its strongest and best definition, that is if I were to define it.

I already thanked someone soon there after on this thread ( or the other on this) for stating that the court got it right, they did.

They got both parts right, the Cali. gov. did not defend prop 8, thats their job and though I think that their job is not to pick and choose what laws they defend, there was no legal standing brought that the court should recognize and, though it means that gay 'marriage' goes forward *shrugs* thats the vagaries of the law, and, the last word. Life will go on.

*****

As a general question for anyone, is my feeling on Marriage a bigoted stance? "

I would not call your position bigoted. However, I fail to understand why so many people seem to have some sort of phobia about using the word, "marriage", and want to use 'civil union" instead. That is, IMO just another way of saying ,"They are not the same as you and me", for no good reason. My 2nd wife and I were married by a justice of the peace in his office. There was no religious presence at all. Your desire to use "civil union" for gay marriage would also have to apply to me, under the circumstances. I see people of all religious persuasions confusing "marriage" with "religious marriage ceremony". It is a matter of semantics, and frankly, It is just another way of separating yourself into a superior class than some of your fellow human beings.

 

[bodecea]

In CA same sex marriage effective immediately.
Kamala Harris just married the two women complainants, in the Supreme Court, in SF, and the two men will wed in LA tonight.

Yep...now it's not just 18,000 of us couples anymore.

 

[Dot Com]

Maybe now Boehner (R) will be less inclined to throw red meat (subjectively legislating morality) to the social con base and work on the economy & tax reform

 

[JoeB131]

Maybe now Boehner (R) will be less inclined to throw red meat (subjectively legislating morality) to the social con base and work on the economy & tax reform

Maybe Pigs will fly...

 

[Redfish]

Maybe now Boehner (R) will be less inclined to throw red meat (subjectively legislating morality) to the social con base and work on the economy & tax reform

maybe now obama will be less inclined to throw red meat to the far left wing libtardian base and work on the economy and tax reform---------or maybe pigs will fly

 

[Dot Com]

the couple that initially brought the case was married (someone may have already mentioned it)

 

[Seawytch]

Maybe now Boehner (R) will be less inclined to throw red meat (subjectively legislating morality) to the social con base and work on the economy & tax reform

maybe now obama will be less inclined to throw red meat to the far left wing libtardian base and work on the economy and tax reform---------or maybe pigs will fly

Examples of this "red meat" that is appealing to only the "liberals"? Oh look, Single Payer! Oops, nope. Oh look, repeal of the Patriot Act! Oops, nope. Hey, Defense Cuts!!! Oops, nope. Legalization of marijuana? Oops, nope.

 

[rightwinger]

The key to DOMA will be the military.

Now the services will have to provide the same recognition and benefits of a heterosexual marriage. It will all come to a head at some Red State military base when they try to deny spousal benefits to someone in uniform

Can't wait for the court case

 

[Katzndogz]

The key really is the military. Specifically the people who won't join because they don't support the evil nation we have become.

 

[bodecea]

The key really is the military. Specifically the people who won't join because they don't support the evil nation we have become.

Odd. DADT has been gone for a while and the military isn't having any problem with recruitment quotas.

 

[Vandalshandle]

The key really is the military. Specifically the people who won't join because they don't support the evil nation we have become.

Evil Nation. I think that would be a great name for a band!