Just in: 6th Circuit Court upholds gay marriage bans in four states

[PaintMyHouse]

Shockingly this is nowhere on Yahoo's front page, even though previous decisions striking down state laws were heralded.
Good, maybe we'll have some common sense on this issue. States have traditionally set criteria for marriage and the Supreme Court has given wide latitude for them to do so. You want gay marriage? Vote for it.

Equality before the law isn't up for a vote, and never should have been.

 

[The Rabbi]

i like how the fox article says there is now a divide in the courts. 20+ to 2 ( maybe 3? )
Yeah thats a divide alright.

Do you think that is not a divide?

really?

Yes. Do you think the courts are divided on this issue?

its amazing you didnt get that answer from my post. Well no its not.

LOL!
What a fucking imbecile you are.
Any dissent within the appellate courts constitutes a divide. It doesnt matter whether its one court or half of them.
Remind me never to respond to your posts. You are clearly too fucking stupid and ignorant to engage.

 

[The Rabbi]

Shockingly this is nowhere on Yahoo's front page, even though previous decisions striking down state laws were heralded.
Good, maybe we'll have some common sense on this issue. States have traditionally set criteria for marriage and the Supreme Court has given wide latitude for them to do so. You want gay marriage? Vote for it.

Equality before the law isn't up for a vote, and never should have been.

I'll remind you that all citizens have equal rights of marriage. Any man who is not already married can marry a woman who is not married and not closely related to him. And vice versa.

 

[The Rabbi]

Seems to be a rift among the courts about the constitutionality of gay marriage bans. I doubt this ruling will hold up under SCOTUS scrutiny, but you never know.

DEVELOPING: A federal appeals court in Cincinnati has upheld anti-gay marriage laws in four states, breaking ranks with other courts that have considered the issue and setting up the prospect of Supreme Court review.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel that heard arguments on gay marriage bans or restrictions in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee on Aug. 6 split 2-1, with Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton writing the majority opinion. The ruling revealed Wednesday creates a divide among federal appeals courts, increasing the likelihood the Supreme Court will now take up the issue.

Federal appeals court upholds gay marriage bans Fox News

Good. Now we have a real fight instead of a steamroller. And the SC will have to rule for the country, and not your way of course.

Keep telling yourself that.
I wonder if Kagan will recuse herself since she's a lez.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Seems to be a rift among the courts about the constitutionality of gay marriage bans. I doubt this ruling will hold up under SCOTUS scrutiny, but you never know.

DEVELOPING: A federal appeals court in Cincinnati has upheld anti-gay marriage laws in four states, breaking ranks with other courts that have considered the issue and setting up the prospect of Supreme Court review.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel that heard arguments on gay marriage bans or restrictions in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee on Aug. 6 split 2-1, with Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton writing the majority opinion. The ruling revealed Wednesday creates a divide among federal appeals courts, increasing the likelihood the Supreme Court will now take up the issue.

Federal appeals court upholds gay marriage bans Fox News

Good. Now we have a real fight instead of a steamroller. And the SC will have to rule for the country, and not your way of course.

Keep telling yourself that.
I wonder if Kagan will recuse herself since she's a lez.

Of course she won't.

Does Thomas recuse himself when civil rights or affirmative action cases come up?

 

[The Rabbi]

Seems to be a rift among the courts about the constitutionality of gay marriage bans. I doubt this ruling will hold up under SCOTUS scrutiny, but you never know.

DEVELOPING: A federal appeals court in Cincinnati has upheld anti-gay marriage laws in four states, breaking ranks with other courts that have considered the issue and setting up the prospect of Supreme Court review.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel that heard arguments on gay marriage bans or restrictions in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee on Aug. 6 split 2-1, with Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton writing the majority opinion. The ruling revealed Wednesday creates a divide among federal appeals courts, increasing the likelihood the Supreme Court will now take up the issue.

Federal appeals court upholds gay marriage bans Fox News

Good. Now we have a real fight instead of a steamroller. And the SC will have to rule for the country, and not your way of course.

Keep telling yourself that.
I wonder if Kagan will recuse herself since she's a lez.

Of course she won't.

Does Thomas recuse himself when civil rights or affirmative action cases come up?

Thomas has a history of not automatically defaulting to whatever the "black community" deems appropriate.
When has a gay judge ever ruled against gay marriage?

 

[mdk]

Good, this will only hasten the SC to take up this issue and settle it once and for all.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Seems to be a rift among the courts about the constitutionality of gay marriage bans. I doubt this ruling will hold up under SCOTUS scrutiny, but you never know.

DEVELOPING: A federal appeals court in Cincinnati has upheld anti-gay marriage laws in four states, breaking ranks with other courts that have considered the issue and setting up the prospect of Supreme Court review.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel that heard arguments on gay marriage bans or restrictions in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee on Aug. 6 split 2-1, with Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton writing the majority opinion. The ruling revealed Wednesday creates a divide among federal appeals courts, increasing the likelihood the Supreme Court will now take up the issue.

Federal appeals court upholds gay marriage bans Fox News

Good. Now we have a real fight instead of a steamroller. And the SC will have to rule for the country, and not your way of course.

Keep telling yourself that.
I wonder if Kagan will recuse herself since she's a lez.

Of course she won't.

Does Thomas recuse himself when civil rights or affirmative action cases come up?

Thomas has a history of not automatically defaulting to whatever the "black community" deems appropriate.
When has a gay judge ever ruled against gay marriage?

Aha, so she should recuse herself because you think you know what her opinion will be, and don't like it.


That doesn't seem like a particularly good reason for recusal to me.

 

[The Rabbi]

Seems to be a rift among the courts about the constitutionality of gay marriage bans. I doubt this ruling will hold up under SCOTUS scrutiny, but you never know.

Federal appeals court upholds gay marriage bans Fox News

Good. Now we have a real fight instead of a steamroller. And the SC will have to rule for the country, and not your way of course.

Keep telling yourself that.
I wonder if Kagan will recuse herself since she's a lez.

Of course she won't.

Does Thomas recuse himself when civil rights or affirmative action cases come up?

Thomas has a history of not automatically defaulting to whatever the "black community" deems appropriate.
When has a gay judge ever ruled against gay marriage?

Aha, so she should recuse herself because you think you know what her opinion will be, and don't like it.


That doesn't seem like a particularly good reason for recusal to me.

I dont think it's a mystery what her opinion will be. She will be automatically biased, which is good reason for recusal.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Good. Now we have a real fight instead of a steamroller. And the SC will have to rule for the country, and not your way of course.

Keep telling yourself that.
I wonder if Kagan will recuse herself since she's a lez.

Of course she won't.

Does Thomas recuse himself when civil rights or affirmative action cases come up?

Thomas has a history of not automatically defaulting to whatever the "black community" deems appropriate.
When has a gay judge ever ruled against gay marriage?

Aha, so she should recuse herself because you think you know what her opinion will be, and don't like it.


That doesn't seem like a particularly good reason for recusal to me.

I dont think it's a mystery what her opinion will be. She will be automatically biased, which is good reason for recusal.

The same could be said about Scalia. Should he recuse himself because of his Catholic "automatic bias"?

 

[Hossfly]

Keep telling yourself that.
I wonder if Kagan will recuse herself since she's a lez.

Of course she won't.

Does Thomas recuse himself when civil rights or affirmative action cases come up?

Thomas has a history of not automatically defaulting to whatever the "black community" deems appropriate.
When has a gay judge ever ruled against gay marriage?

Aha, so she should recuse herself because you think you know what her opinion will be, and don't like it.


That doesn't seem like a particularly good reason for recusal to me.

I dont think it's a mystery what her opinion will be. She will be automatically biased, which is good reason for recusal.

The same could be said about Scalia. Should he recuse himself because of his Catholic "automatic bias"?

Maybe the whole bunch will recuse themselves. They're all carryiny baggage of some kind.

 

[Plasmaball]

i like how the fox article says there is now a divide in the courts. 20+ to 2 ( maybe 3? )
Yeah thats a divide alright.

Do you think that is not a divide?

really?

Yes. Do you think the courts are divided on this issue?

its amazing you didnt get that answer from my post. Well no its not.

LOL!
What a fucking imbecile you are.
Any dissent within the appellate courts constitutes a divide. It doesnt matter whether its one court or half of them.
Remind me never to respond to your posts. You are clearly too fucking stupid and ignorant to engage.

finally!

 

[JakeStarkey]

FIRST, guys, let's see if the full 6th rehears the case, as I think it will.

SECOND, guys, the divide is insignificant at this point; if the the full 6th finds against marriage equality, then it is a major divide.

THIRD, guys, much law is decided by not hearing cases; so, yes, that is one of the ways it is done.

Finally, and this is merely my opinion, I think the full court will hear it and vacate the 2-1 ruling, and marriage equality will come to the 6th.

 

[mdk]

Keep telling yourself that.
I wonder if Kagan will recuse herself since she's a lez.

Of course she won't.

Does Thomas recuse himself when civil rights or affirmative action cases come up?

Thomas has a history of not automatically defaulting to whatever the "black community" deems appropriate.
When has a gay judge ever ruled against gay marriage?

Aha, so she should recuse herself because you think you know what her opinion will be, and don't like it.


That doesn't seem like a particularly good reason for recusal to me.

I dont think it's a mystery what her opinion will be. She will be automatically biased, which is good reason for recusal.

The same could be said about Scalia. Should he recuse himself because of his Catholic "automatic bias"?

Of course not. Scalia is going to rule aganist gay marriage so his "automatic bias" is just jack and jolly.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“At this point, the decision conflicts directly with federal appeals courts in the Fourth, Seventh, Ninth and Tenth Circuits — precisely the kind of division of judgment that ordinarily will lead the Supreme Court to step in to resolve the split, especially on an issue of fundamental constitutional significance.”

Indeed.

However unwilling it may be to do so, there is now a compelling – and unavoidable – reason for the Court to hear the case.

 

[The Rabbi]

Keep telling yourself that.
I wonder if Kagan will recuse herself since she's a lez.

Of course she won't.

Does Thomas recuse himself when civil rights or affirmative action cases come up?

Thomas has a history of not automatically defaulting to whatever the "black community" deems appropriate.
When has a gay judge ever ruled against gay marriage?

Aha, so she should recuse herself because you think you know what her opinion will be, and don't like it.


That doesn't seem like a particularly good reason for recusal to me.

I dont think it's a mystery what her opinion will be. She will be automatically biased, which is good reason for recusal.

The same could be said about Scalia. Should he recuse himself because of his Catholic "automatic bias"?

No. Sotomaior is also Catholic and I dont know which way she will rule.
Again, has any gay judge ever ruled against gay marriage? For that matter, has any gay politician ever opposed gay marriage?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

THE RABBI SAID:

“Keep telling yourself that.
I wonder if Kagan will recuse herself since she's a lez.”

You're truly among the most useless and moronic of the rightwing posters, and that's quite an accomplishment.

 

[mdk]

Of course she won't.

Does Thomas recuse himself when civil rights or affirmative action cases come up?

Thomas has a history of not automatically defaulting to whatever the "black community" deems appropriate.
When has a gay judge ever ruled against gay marriage?

Aha, so she should recuse herself because you think you know what her opinion will be, and don't like it.


That doesn't seem like a particularly good reason for recusal to me.

I dont think it's a mystery what her opinion will be. She will be automatically biased, which is good reason for recusal.

The same could be said about Scalia. Should he recuse himself because of his Catholic "automatic bias"?

No. Sotomaior is also Catholic and I dont know which way she will rule.
Again, has any gay judge ever ruled against gay marriage? For that matter, has any gay politician ever opposed gay marriage?

Larry Craig and Aaron Schock.

 

[The Rabbi]

THE RABBI SAID:

“Keep telling yourself that.
I wonder if Kagan will recuse herself since she's a lez.”

You're truly among the most useless and moronic of the rightwing posters, and that's quite an accomplishment.

So what's your bet? Will she recuse or not?

 

[The Rabbi]

Thomas has a history of not automatically defaulting to whatever the "black community" deems appropriate.
When has a gay judge ever ruled against gay marriage?

Aha, so she should recuse herself because you think you know what her opinion will be, and don't like it.


That doesn't seem like a particularly good reason for recusal to me.

I dont think it's a mystery what her opinion will be. She will be automatically biased, which is good reason for recusal.

The same could be said about Scalia. Should he recuse himself because of his Catholic "automatic bias"?

No. Sotomaior is also Catholic and I dont know which way she will rule.
Again, has any gay judge ever ruled against gay marriage? For that matter, has any gay politician ever opposed gay marriage?

Larry Craig and Aaron Schock.

Larry Craig isnt gay.
Guess again.