Down goes DOMA!!

[bendog]

Any restriction applicable equally to trad marriage that doesn't unequally apply to same sex remains valid. Chrst people, get a grip. LOL

 

[Mad Scientist]

As I understand it there is no more DOMA so the States must make their own rules.

 

[Hyrcanus]

Can an old lady marry her sister so sis can get her social security benefits???

only if incestual marriage is legal in that state.

 

[P@triot]

What next ? The Supreme's going to rule it's ok to marry goats ?

Sadly, they essentially just did. For one thing, they have just set the precedence that polygamy is legal. You simply cannot "discriminate" against "consenting adults" (the code words the homosexuals love). Well, guess what? Polygamy is nothing but consenting adults.

 

[MeBelle]

Tomorrow is Prop 8.

10:11
Amy Howe: Page 4 of hte Roberts dissent, talking about Prop 8: "We hold today that we lack jurisdiction to consider it in the particular context of Hollingsworth v. Perry."
10:12
Amy Howe: To be clear, the Court has not yet released the decision in Prop 8, but there is language in Windsor telegraphing that the Court will dismiss on standing.

SCOTUSblog <<Live blog

Kevin Russell: The Chief has announced that all remaining orders will be released tomorrow at 9:30.

What are you talking about? They just ruled on Prop 8. They refused to rule and sent it back down to the California

Actually, they sent it back down to the lower court....that already ruled to strike down Prop H8. It's gone.

Ruling? I missed it!

 

[Oddball]

As I understand it there is no more DOMA so the States must make their own rules.

That's the way I read it....No federal jurisdiction.

 

[TemplarKormac]

What are you talking about? They just ruled on Prop 8. They refused to rule and sent it back down to the California

Actually, they sent it back down to the lower court....that already ruled to strike down Prop H8. It's gone.

Ruling? I missed it!

Vacated and Remanded were the words used.

 

[Roadrunner]

Wish they would just get the hell out of marriage period.

That's a dumb libertarian talking point.

Marriage (dissolution of marriage) is about property.

Government's main function is to protect property (boundaries, ownership, possessions).

Lol...wrong. Marriage is a CONTRACT between 2 people absolutely no reason the government needs to be involved if its a divorce and only then the civil court needs involved.

There is no logical reason to limit it to two people.

I doubt that bigamy laws will stand, if challenged.

If a cluster wants a contract, the government should allow them to craft it, and register it at the courthouse.

if a cluster can find a church to marry them, then they can do that to.

Totally separate issues.

 

[bodecea]

What next ? The Supreme's going to rule it's ok to marry goats ?

Sadly, they essentially just did. For one thing, they have just set the precedence that polygamy is legal. You simply cannot "discriminate" against "consenting adults" (the code words the homosexuals love). Well, guess what? Polygamy is nothing but consenting adults.

No, they did not. Unless you can show that a goat is a law-abiding, tax-paying citizen able to consent.

 

[MeBelle]

DOMA and Prop 8! Woo motherfucking hoo!!!!!!

Marriage in CA and Federal recognition of those marriages!!!

Tomorrow is Prop 8.

10:11
Amy Howe: Page 4 of hte Roberts dissent, talking about Prop 8: "We hold today that we lack jurisdiction to consider it in the particular context of Hollingsworth v. Perry."
10:12
Amy Howe: To be clear, the Court has not yet released the decision in Prop 8, but there is language in Windsor telegraphing that the Court will dismiss on standing.

SCOTUSblog <<Live blog

Kevin Russell: The Chief has announced that all remaining orders will be released tomorrow at 9:30.

What are you talking about? They just ruled on Prop 8. They refused to rule and sent it back down to the California

Ruling? Link? Anything official? I must have missed it.

 

[Katzndogz]

As I understand it there is no more DOMA so the States must make their own rules.

DOMA only affects federal benefits not state benefits and does not legalize same sex marriage in those states that do not recognize it. The couple is still entitled to all federal benefits, but not state benefits.

 

[deltex1]

Any restriction applicable equally to trad marriage that doesn't unequally apply to same sex remains valid. Chrst people, get a grip. LOL

Your statement has been forwarded to Websters for diagraming and deconstruction.

 

[boedicca]

Unintended consequences: We may have an explosion of "convenience marriages" to qualify for government benefits way beyond the original intentions and presumptions of these programs.

What ratio do we have of these now?

On the one hand, I see people say homosexuality is an unnatural perversion of a small minority, so it must not be tolerated. If it's such a small minority, how will "convenience" marriages be a material issue?

Marriage entails LIABILITIES as well as BENEFITS. A convenience marriage exposes one partner to the other partner's excessive credit card bills etc. Given the marriage penalty in the income tax - there is a deterrent regarding convenience marriages for higher income people. Lower income people likely already benefit from government transfer payments.

So, this is a red herring.

And really. Get a grip. This is a distraction from the real issues damaging our country right now.

 

[Roadrunner]

Sad day for Faith and Religion in the Western World.

Great day for the perversion of one of the longest running institutions in the history of man.

Marriage in the bible --

A family patriarch trades his underage daughter to another man for cows and land.


Property.


Get educated, sweetie.

Underage???? Not according to those times. Expect age limits to fall too, if challenged hard enough.

 

[Oddball]

As I understand it there is no more DOMA so the States must make their own rules.

DOMA only affects federal benefits not state benefits and does not legalize same sex marriage in those states that do not recognize it. The couple is still entitled to all federal benefits, but not state benefits.

So there we have it....Gay marriage isn't about equaaallllllityyyyy or loooooove....It's all about the Benjamins.

Like we already didn't know that.

 

[Hyrcanus]

So there we have it....Gay marriage isn't about equaaallllllityyyyy or loooooove....It's all about the Benjamins.

Like we already didn't know that.

how many straight couples are willing to give up THEIR Federal benefits?

 

[Roadrunner]

What next ? The Supreme's going to rule it's ok to marry goats ?

No, I figure NAMBLA gets in on the act next.

 

[National Socialist]

Now does this allow the states individually to decide to accept or not accept gay marriage? BC I know NC just banned it last year...

They've set a new legal standard and that will be used to sue bigoted states in federal court.

They should have just gone full "equal protection" and declared all state laws unconstitutional, but this just means more billable hours for lawyers and state employees.

Well we have this cool thing called the 10th amendment...states rights and all.

Now does this allow the states individually to decide to accept or not accept gay marriage? BC I know NC just banned it last year...

Not exactly. I have been following this with an eye to federal tax law. DOMA was the only thing preventing the IRS from recognizing gay marriages. It will apply to EVERY STATE. The system is analogous to common law marriage; once a marriage is legally created in one state, moving to a state that does not recognize such marriages does not undo the marriage. So someone legally married in the District of Columbia to a member of the same sex does not become unmarried when they move to Virginia or North Carolina, regardless of the state laws there. I predict that same sex couples will file married joint returns from at least 49 states come April!

Interesting...It would really piss off the tea party nuts we got running my state if it was allowed here LOL

That's a dumb libertarian talking point.

Marriage (dissolution of marriage) is about property.

Government's main function is to protect property (boundaries, ownership, possessions).

Lol...wrong. Marriage is a CONTRACT between 2 people absolutely no reason the government needs to be involved if its a divorce and only then the civil court needs involved.

There is no logical reason to limit it to two people.

I doubt that bigamy laws will stand, if challenged.

If a cluster wants a contract, the government should allow them to craft it, and register it at the courthouse.

if a cluster can find a church to marry them, then they can do that to.

Totally separate issues.

Truth. I should have said a contract between at least 2 people...

Oh and the tea party folks are having meltdowns! Sheesh! I didn't realize allowing 2 or more people to sign a piece of paper and put rings on each others fingers declaring their love for each other interfered with their daily lives!

 

[boedicca]

So there we have it....Gay marriage isn't about equaaallllllityyyyy or loooooove....It's all about the Benjamins.

Like we already didn't know that.

how many straight couples are willing to give up THEIR Federal benefits?

Considering the declining ratio of marriage among straight adults, a great many.

But you miss the real point. The government pays people to not get married. That's why we have the tragic waste of human life due to government dependency caused by unmarried women having babies they cannot support (and who grow up without a father figure).

 

[Avatar4321]

Unintended consequences: We may have an explosion of "convenience marriages" to qualify for government benefits way beyond the original intentions and presumptions of these programs.

Just another way marriage is destroyed because of the gay marriage push