Supreme Court Weighing Gay Marriage Cases (politicians, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, document)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They just vote on the cases. They won't even get written briefs or hear oral arguments for months yet. While some Justices may have ideas where they are going on a case, there is no set, agreed-upon decision. And they won't take a preliminary poll of Justices to see who stands where until after briefs and arguments. And even that doesnt mean there won't be a Justice changing position after the first informal poll. It's not like the sat around today and five of them said, "Let's hear this case because we think we should issue ruling X!". That's not how conferences work.
And like I said, with only four Justices required to grant cert, we don't even know if there is a majority of Justices who want to hear the case.
Perry v. Hollingsworth may only pertain to circumstances unique to California at this point, but the broader point that fundamental rights, once granted to a class, may not be revoked is a substantial issue worth exploring in the way it expands upon the majority decision in Romer v. Evans. The case is actually has broader implications than same-sex marriage.
On the Perry v Hollingsworth case. SCOTUSblog said it questions "whether the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the State of California from defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman." Hollingsworth v. Perry : SCOTUSblog
If that is the case, wouldn't this have impact on other states that have similar definitions in their state constitutions?
In fact, I don't understand why an effeminate man wants to marry another effeminate man?
Does such a "love" really last?
Is there any foundation for marriage at all?
In fact, I don't understand why an effeminate man wants to marry another effeminate man?
Does such a "love" really last?
Is there any foundation for marriage at all?
Not all gay men are effeminate. There was a boxer that came out recently, I'd like to see you call him effeminate.
On the Perry v Hollingsworth case. SCOTUSblog said it questions "whether the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the State of California from defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman." Hollingsworth v. Perry : SCOTUSblog
If that is the case, wouldn't this have impact on other states that have similar definitions in their state constitutions?
The Ninth Circuit's ruling was predicated on the notion that a fundamental right, once granted to a class, may not be revoked. California is unique in that same-sex marriage was once legal, then was barred. It is this combination of actions which Perry v. Hollingsworth as it stands now prohibits.
So, if the USSC affirms the Ninth's decision without any substantive changes, then same-sex marriage becomes legal in California but not in any other state -- because no other state has allowed and then subsequently prohibited same-sex marriage. However, it would mean that those states which allow same-sex marriage at present, or ever do in the future, would be precluded from then revoking same-sex marriage. Not terribly relevant at the moment, since there seems to be little chance of that happening in any of the nine states where same-sex marriage is currently legal.
Nonetheless, little steps. Precedents upon which a future Loving-esque decision will be built.
Even if not all gay men are effeminate, most are, or many are. So it's very likely that two such men make a couple. no?
Um, no.
There are gay men that look and act like lumberjacks, there are gay men who look and act like pro hockey players, there are gay men who look and act like the average Joe walking down the street. The type of man they are attracted to varies as much as the type of woman that straight men are attracted to.
There are gay men that look and act like lumberjacks, there are gay men who look and act like pro hockey players, there are gay men who look and act like the average Joe walking down the street. The type of man they are attracted to varies as much as the type of woman that straight men are attracted to.
Let go of the stereotype, and get to know people.
Tell me some famous gay men who are not effeminate.
I know some "out" gays in my life, they are all effeminate! Not even a single exception.
The Ninth Circuit's ruling was predicated on the notion that a fundamental right, once granted to a class, may not be revoked. California is unique in that same-sex marriage was once legal, then was barred. It is this combination of actions which Perry v. Hollingsworth as it stands now prohibits.
So, if the USSC affirms the Ninth's decision without any substantive changes, then same-sex marriage becomes legal in California but not in any other state -- because no other state has allowed and then subsequently prohibited same-sex marriage. However, it would mean that those states which allow same-sex marriage at present, or ever do in the future, would be precluded from then revoking same-sex marriage. Not terribly relevant at the moment, since there seems to be little chance of that happening in any of the nine states where same-sex marriage is currently legal.
Nonetheless, little steps. Precedents upon which a future Loving-esque decision will be built.
The bolded was my understanding also, which is why I got confused when reading over the info @ SCOTUSblog.
Thanks for clearing that up. And I agree baby steps.
On the DOMA case, wouldn't couples from a state where SSM wasn't legal be able to get married in another state, and be federally recognized even if their marriage is not recognized by their home state?
In fact, I don't understand why an effeminate man wants to marry another effeminate man?
Does such a "love" really last?
Is there any foundation for marriage at all?
So?
I am a straight man.
I don't 'understand' (ie, I cannot see the attraction) the sexual appeal of a man to a woman. Yet I can reflect upon my own attraction to women, and comprehend how a woman can be attracted to a man in ways that must be analogous. And I can do the same regarding a man being attracted to a man, or a woman being attracted to a woman. It doesn't really require any more than the barest bit of imagination and empathy.
But beyond all that, I can't really think that my failure to 'understand' something is a basis for prohibiting that thing. That would be rather narcissistic of me, no?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
