do you think a Supreme Court decision on gay marriage will help you? (legal, racism)

[Virtual Insanity]

Are you hoping the Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage being a constitutional right? Considering that it might help more moderates to vote Republicans at a time when around 60% of Americans support gay marriage. "I don't care either way" will be looked at as a yes.

[RebelCreator]

I think they will say it is yes. (its not btw) and no I won't support that decision.

[nvxplorer]

Originally Posted by RebelCreator

I think they will say it is yes. (its not btw) and no I won't support that decision.

You're correct, marriage itself is not a right, but equal protection under the law is.

[Fiyero]

Originally Posted by RebelCreator

I think they will say it is yes. (its not btw) and no I won't support that decision.

Marriage is a fundamental right according to the SCOTUS, and no one cares if you support the decision. You have no power to change it.

[shooting4life]

Gay marriage should be allowed. It is not a right in the strictest sense, but a 14th amendment issue.

Meaning, the government could legally ban all marriage, but not marriage for just one group.

Personally, I think government should have zero role in marriage (meaning marriage does not exist in a legal sense).

[nvxplorer]

Originally Posted by Fiyero

Marriage is a fundamental right according to the SCOTUS, and no one cares if you support the decision. You have no power to change it.

When did SCOTUS rule that marriage is a fundamental right?

[Fiyero]

Originally Posted by nvxplorer

When did SCOTUS rule that marriage is a fundamental right?

Loving v. Virginia, along with a dozen other cases.

[Volobjectitarian]

The Supreme Court, at various times, has decided that:

• Black people really are 3/5th of an actual person.
• The government can interfere with private contracts if it feels like it
• political speech is less free than other speech
• institutional racism sponsored by government is proper and necessary
• eminent domain includes "because the goverment can make more off another property owner than you, so shut yer yap"
• the commerce clause means the government can indeed tell you what to buy and penalize you for not buying what they tell you in the amount they tell you
• locking innocent Americans into concentration camps out of "military necessity" is proper and constitutional

Forgive me then, if I do not base all notions of right/wrong, proper/improper, and moral/immoral on what that particular gang of judicial oligarchs has to say on the matter.

[nvxplorer]

Originally Posted by Fiyero

Loving v. Virginia, along with a dozen other cases.

I don't think so. Loving v Virginia was a case of equal protection, not marriage itself. If marriage were a fundamental right, there would be very few restrictions, but there are many. Age, blood relatives, multiple spouses.

[PedroMartinez]

I'm going with:

Not really, because the government has no business in "authorizing" marriage.

Marriage should be a social and/or religious practice that needs no government approval.

If two gay men want to be married, they should get "married" in whatever venue they choose with whatever "validation" is offered just like a man and a woman.

If the government is out of it, everybody is equal.