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.
That's right, where same-sex marriage was banned, it has new been made legal twenty times in the United States. In 17 states, once. In another state (California), twice. And in the District of Columbia.
And when has legal same-sex marriage ever been repealed? Just once - in California.
That's not even counting the eight Indian Reservations where it has been made legal (not a one has ever repealed a law allowing same-sex marriage).
Then there's the 15 or so (the list keeps growing) countries around the world that allow it nationwide, not to mention the sub-national jurisdictions in places like the UK and Mexico where it has been legalized (but never subsequently prohibited).
This is entirely a one-way issue.
Justice is winning. Animus is failing, and failing miserably.
Justice is winning. Animus is failing, and failing miserably.
Before you spike the ball and do some silly victory dance, let's honestly admit that many states have had same sex marriage imposed on them against the voted will of the people by unelected federal judges. How many states have voted for same sex marriage?
Before you spike the ball and do some silly victory dance, let's honestly admit that many states have had same sex marriage imposed on them against the voted will of the people by unelected federal judges.
It is always entertaining to find out which people despise the American concept of judicial review. Hypocritically, of course - only when a ruling doesn't go their way. You'll never actually hear them decrying the concept itself, only crying when the jurisprudence doesn't jibe with their animus.
However, to answer your question - two. To be precise, California and Utah.
Quote:
How many states have voted for same sex marriage?
Three - Maine, Maryland and Washington. And another one (Minnesota) voted not to enshrine a same-sex marriage ban in its constitution. All of which is irrelevant, for we are a republic. All the states are republics, as mandated by the Constitution. The fetish for rule-by-referenda is absurd. And, as with the petulant tantrums over judicial review, only rearing its hypocritical head when certain people perceive that the public opinion is on their side.
So, all you've really got is pretending to care about the process. Well, I guess a loser has to hang his hat on something...
Well, I guess a loser has to hang his hat on something...
I don't think we'll know who's the winner and who's the loser until the Supreme Court hears a 10th Amendment test on the state's rights to determine who can legally marry. Marriage is not addressed in the Constitution. We may see a decision between the 14th Amendment repeal of slavery as currently "interpreted" by pro-gay judges and the 10th Amendment rights of the states. I believe the Bill of Rights will trump the 14th Amendment which is being wrongly interpreted anyway, but only time will tell. This is not anywhere near "over". If Obama gets to appoint one more lesbian atheist to the Supreme Court, then your side will admittedly surely win and America will surely lose.
I don't think we'll know who's the winner and who's the loser until the Supreme Court hears a 10th Amendment test on the state's rights to determine who can legally marry. Marriage is not addressed in the Constitution. We may see a decision between the 14th Amendment repeal of slavery as currently "interpreted" by pro-gay judges and the 10th Amendment rights of the states. I believe the Bill of Rights will trump the 14th Amendment which is being wrongly interpreted anyway, but only time will tell. This is not anywhere near "over". If Obama gets to appoint one more lesbian atheist to the Supreme Court, then your side will admittedly surely win and America will surely lose.
That decision has long since been made - state's determine who may marry, within the Constitutional limits on class-based discrimination. Sexual orientation, like other classifications before it (race, religion, etc.), will be made a suspect class. This is not a marriage issue, but an issue of equal protection of the laws. And that is most certainly addressed in the Constitution.
Like I told another poster yesterday (who promptly ran away), you would do well to read Judge Shelby's decision, specifically focusing on scrutiny and suspect class. It would be useful to actually understand the Constritutional issues that you're trying so hard to dislike.
Some food for thought:
Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan. That's four.
Kennedy, who has personally authored the majority opinions in Romer, Lawrence and Windsor, the three great landmark USSC decisions regarding discrimination against gays. That's five.
When it gets to the high court, it is indeed over.
PS - It was the 13th Amendment that repealed slavery, not the 14th.
PS - It was the 13th Amendment that repealed slavery, not the 14th.
The 13th and 14th both deal with slavery, and the 14th gives citizenship to fomer slaves. Slavery wasn't really over until they had the full rights of citizenship like every other American. The 14 th Amendment was never about gays at all, it was about former slaves. That is a judicial misinterpretation by pro-gay judges forcing it to mean something it doesn't.
Don't count too confidently on Ginsburg. Her health is not good.
The 13th and 14th both deal with slavery, and the 14th gives citizenship to fomer slaves. Slavery wasn't really over until they had the full rights of citizenship like every other American. The 14 th Amendment was never about gays at all. That is a judicial misinterpretation forcing it to mean something it doesn't.
Don't count too confidently on Ginsburg. Her health is not good.
You claimed the 14th Amendment repealed slavery. Now you're trying to weasel out of your incorrect claim. The 13th Amendment dealt with slavery; the 14th Amendment does not - rather, it deals with the systematic oppression of people, outside of slavery. The authors of the Reconstruction Amendments knew that simply ending slavery would not end oppression. You're simply underscoring your general Constitutional ignorance here.
The 14th Amendment was also never about gender, or religion. Yet, it covers those things. Not surprising, you're not complaining about that. More hypocrisy.
I have little doubt that Justice Ginsburg's replacement by President Obama will be equally opposed to the bigotry you champion. There is also little doubt that the cases in the 9th and 10th circuits will be at the doorstep of the Supreme Court long before January 2017.
Cheer all you want for her death, but it will not help you on this issue.
You claimed the 14th Amendment repealed slavery. Now you're trying to weasel out of your incorrect claim.
You voted for "Period" Obama didn't you? Let me weasel just a bit.
I didn't mean to make you angry. I thought you were genuinely interested in the debate about the upcoming Supreme Court test. I certainly don't wish any ill will on Ginsberg, but her health has been in the news. I'll leave you to your contemplations.
It was a law that stated what constituted marriage in the state of Utah.
And the law was unconstitutional based on the 14th amendment.
Quote:
The court hereby declares
that Amendment 3 is unconstitutional because it denies the Plaintiffs their rights to due process
and equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution
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.
