5-4 Gay Marriage Upheld

[Serenity Now]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SUPREME_COURT_GAY_MARRIAGE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-06-26-10-02-52

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

[BoulderSooner79]

Everyone is out consulting with their wedding planners.

[SicEmBaylor]

If one were to follow the original intent of the Constitution, it's pretty clear to me that marriage is an issue that's the responsibility of the individual states. If anyone wants to blame anything for this ruling then blame the 14th Amendment -- arguably the worst of all the constitutional amendments. It extends equal rights under the law to all individuals that supersedes state authority on this question. It effectively removes the ability of state legislatures to craft domestic policy consistent with the beliefs and wishes of the citizenry they represent.

But, despite the fact that I believe the 14th should be repealed, it exists. And since it exists, state laws banning homosexual marriage are clearly unconstitutional.

Even still, I would support my state legislature legalizing marriage equality. Marriage should be nothing more than a private contract between two or more consenting adults with government only becoming involved when it's necessary to enforce the terms of that contract. Otherwise, marriage should be out of the hands of government.

[BoulderSooner79]

This one posted to Landthieves and it cracked me up...

____________________
Ha! Now gay people going to KNOW THE REAL MISSERY OF BEING IN A MARRIAGE AND ALWAYS ARGUNING ABOUT SEX< MONEY< KIDS< THE ****ING CEILING FAN, AND I CAN SPEND $300 WITHOUT HAVING TO TELL YOU BECAUSE IT WAS ON SALE AND YOU ALWYAS TELL ME TO LOOK FOR BARGAINS, WHY THE HELL WON'T YOU JUST TELL ME WHERE YOU WANT TO EAT, I'M TIRED OF MAKING 35 SUGGESTION AND YOU SAYING NO TO EACH ONE OF THEM, **** THAT, WOULD IT ****ING KILL YOU TO NOT USE THE DEBIT CARD, DOES TARGET HAVE A ****ING TRACTOR BEAM THAT PULLS YOU IN - I OUGHT TO JUST GO CASH MY PAYCHECK WALK INTO TARGET AND THROW IT ON THE FLOOR AND LEAVE, AND Kohl's CASH IS NOT REAL CASH IT'S HOUSEWIFE BAIT. STOP TAKING MY GOT-DAMN PHONE CHARGER!

Welcome to the ****ing Show gay people!

[olevetonahill]

Dont much care. It aint the Feds Nor the states business who marries who. Nor who or how I ****.

[FaninAma]

If one were to follow the original intent of the Constitution, it's pretty clear to me that marriage is an issue that's the responsibility of the individual states. If anyone wants to blame anything for this ruling then blame the 14th Amendment -- arguably the worst of all the constitutional amendments. It extends equal rights under the law to all individuals that supersedes state authority on this question. It effectively removes the ability of state legislatures to craft domestic policy consistent with the beliefs and wishes of the citizenry they represent.

But, despite the fact that I believe the 14th should be repealed, it exists. And since it exists, state laws banning homosexual marriage are clearly unconstitutional.

Even still, I would support my state legislature legalizing marriage equality. Marriage should be nothing more than a private contract between two or more consenting adults with government only becoming involved when it's necessary to enforce the terms of that contract. Otherwise, marriage should be out of the hands of government.

I would have preferred it be approved by the voters. I get sick of being told how as a society we should think and act. The hypocritical, experts-on-everything SCOTUS justices have essentially disemboweled the principle of self-determination.

[Serenity Now]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/despite-this-weeks-victories-obama-has-struggled-at-the-supreme-court/

[SoonerorLater]

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

John Adams

[Eielson]

Marriage should be nothing more than a private contract between two or more consenting adults

Preach! I have a hot cousin...

[BoulderSooner79]

Preach! I have a hot cousin...

PICs ?

(You do mean female, right? After today, you need to be specific.)

[SicEmBaylor]

Preach! I have a hot cousin...

Incest is disgusting, of course, but if two consenting family members want to enter into a marriage contract with one another then it's really not my business.

[Eielson]

(You do mean female, right? After today, you need to be specific.)

Does that matter to you?? Love is love.

Bigot.

[Eielson]

Incest is disgusting, of course, but if two consenting family members want to enter into a marriage contract with one another then it's really not my business.

At least you're consistent. Gay marriage advocates have been making a strong case for legalizing incest. Bring on polygamy as well.

[olevetonahill]

Incest is disgusting, of course, but if two consenting family members want to enter into a marriage contract with one another then it's really not my business.

If she wants to Boink ? Whats wrong?

[BoulderSooner79]

At least you're consistent. Gay marriage advocates have been making a strong case for legalizing incest. Bring on polygamy as well.

I haven't read anywhere about gay marriage advocates wanting to legalize incest. Not saying your wrong, but I read from many news sources, so it must not be very common. I personally have nothing against plural marriages, but I see no reason for any kind of government recognition. Team up if you want, but don't try to claim more dependents on your income taxes. BTW, what the early Mormons and current radical Mormon offshoots practiced wasn't polygamy - it was child sex slavery.

[SicEmBaylor]

I haven't read anywhere about gay marriage advocates wanting to legalize incest.

I would legalize incest and polygamy.

[Eielson]

I haven't read anywhere about gay marriage advocates wanting to legalize incest. Not saying your wrong, but I read from many news sources, so it must not be very common.

That's actually my point; most don't want incest legalized, but I've yet to see any arguments that advocate gay marriage that couldn't be equally applied to incest.

[BoulderSooner79]

That's actually my point; most don't want incest legalized, but I've yet to see any arguments that advocate gay marriage that couldn't be equally applied to incest.

So the ol slippery slope? Could be, there is that possibility with any ruling - side effects. I'm the ultimate pragmatist and not an idealist, so I see little danger here. I don't see big brother knocking down the doors of bizarro siblings shacking up. I could see such a couple being prosecuted for child abuse if they produced some sickly offspring and that would be a good thing. Same with group marriages - and I don't consider that Warren Jeffs thing an exception. Big brother went after them because they set up a closed compound and systematically forced young girls to marry "church" elders. To me, plural marriage involves consenting adults and I've known a couple of such groups. I see no problem there, but also see no need for any kind of government recognition (i.e. tax dependents).

[Serenity Now]

So the ol slippery slope? Could be, there is that possibility with any ruling - side effects. I'm the ultimate pragmatist and not an idealist, so I see little danger here. I don't see big brother knocking down the doors of bizarro siblings shacking up. I could see such a couple being prosecuted for child abuse if they produced some sickly offspring and that would be a good thing. Same with group marriages - and I don't consider that Warren Jeffs thing an exception. Big brother went after them because they set up a closed compound and systematically forced young girls to marry "church" elders. To me, plural marriage involves consenting adults and I've known a couple of such groups. I see no problem there, but also see no need for any kind of government recognition (i.e. tax dependents).
I agree. My wife watches that Sister Wives show. Polygamy is not my cup of tea but I see a lot worse "traditional" marriage parenting.

[Eielson]

So the ol slippery slope?

Not exactly what I would call it. I tend to think of slipper slopes along the lines of "you smoked weed, so now you're going to get addicted to crack" argument.

This is more of a "you took the Bible out of schools to keep religion out, so now you're going to take the Quran out."


Could be, there is that possibility with any ruling - side effects. I'm the ultimate pragmatist and not an idealist, so I see little danger here. I don't see big brother knocking down the doors of bizarro siblings shacking up. I could see such a couple being prosecuted for child abuse if they produced some sickly offspring and that would be a good thing. Same with group marriages - and I don't consider that Warren Jeffs thing an exception. Big brother went after them because they set up a closed compound and systematically forced young girls to marry "church" elders. To me, plural marriage involves consenting adults and I've known a couple of such groups. I see no problem there, but also see no need for any kind of government recognition (i.e. tax dependents).

I'm not saying I'm upset that gay marriage is legal. I really don't care. All I'm saying is that we should be consistent. If we're redefining marriage to "any two or more consenting adults," then let's actually define marriage that way.