Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Will the Supreme Court rule that gay and lesbian couples have a right to legally wed?
SCOTUS will rule AGAINST legalizing same sex marriage 38 18.91%
SCOTUS will rule FOR legalizing same sex marriage 163 81.09%
Voters: 201. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 05-28-2015, 01:31 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
14,361 posts, read 9,748,555 times
Reputation: 6663

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartacus713 View Post
You need a third option, which is that the Supreme Court will rule that it is up to the states to make this determination, which is the Federalist position, and basically the status quo that was in effect before the left began filing suits in the courts of leftist judges with a view towards stacking up favorable rulings without any negative ones.

This third option is the most likely, partisan leftist "experts" opinions on the subject notwithstanding.

Under that ruling, some states will have it, and some states won't.
Exactly what I was going to post!

The citizens of each state should be the ones deciding this. Those of you wanting the government out of the marriage business should be voting for states rights instead.

 
Old 05-28-2015, 01:39 PM
 
Location: Home is Where You Park It
23,856 posts, read 13,644,508 times
Reputation: 15481
Quote:
Originally Posted by steven_h View Post
Exactly what I was going to post!

The citizens of each state should be the ones deciding this. Those of you wanting the government out of the marriage business should be voting for states rights instead.

Actually, the most likely third option I see is that a state will be required to recognize a legally performed SSM from another state, but is not required to offer marriage licenses to same-sex couples itself.

I don't think they'll do that though, it doesn't seem satisfying from anyone's point of view.

The problem with your scenario - a same-sex couple is traveling through a state that bars same-sex marriage. The couple is involved in a vehicle accident and one of them is seriously injured. Does the spouse have the right to make decisions for the injured person?
 
Old 05-28-2015, 04:45 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
8,464 posts, read 10,878,370 times
Reputation: 10705
Judging from the responses posted after my last post, I am left with the opinion most, if not all of you feel the court is ruling on ssm.

When are any of you going to understand that ssm is not what is being put forth to the court?
What they will be ruling on is the validity of the fourteenth amendment, and if states have the right to deny equality when it adopts laws.
Are states going to be allowed to have certain laws for one group, and a different set of laws for other groups?
That is all that is being decided.

Depending on the ruling, ssm will, or will not be the law of the land, but ssm is not what the court will be deciding.

Bob.
 
Old 05-28-2015, 05:14 PM
 
Location: Home is Where You Park It
23,856 posts, read 13,644,508 times
Reputation: 15481
Quote:
Originally Posted by CALGUY View Post
Judging from the responses posted after my last post, I am left with the opinion most, if not all of you feel the court is ruling on ssm.

When are any of you going to understand that ssm is not what is being put forth to the court?
What they will be ruling on is the validity of the fourteenth amendment, and if states have the right to deny equality when it adopts laws.
Are states going to be allowed to have certain laws for one group, and a different set of laws for other groups?
That is all that is being decided.

Depending on the ruling, ssm will, or will not be the law of the land, but ssm is not what the court will be deciding.

Bob.
Yes, it is a 14th amendment case that is being decided. But the case is occasioned by SSM, so that is what a lot of people are focussing on. Quite a few people (but not all, alas) posting here are aware of that. Despite the frequent sidetracking about making babies and other extraneous issues.
 
Old 05-28-2015, 05:19 PM
 
Location: Phila & NYC
4,765 posts, read 3,266,794 times
Reputation: 1945
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqueg View Post
Actually, the most likely third option I see is that a state will be required to recognize a legally performed SSM from another state, but is not required to offer marriage licenses to same-sex couples itself.

I don't think they'll do that though, it doesn't seem satisfying from anyone's point of view.

The problem with your scenario - a same-sex couple is traveling through a state that bars same-sex marriage. The couple is involved in a vehicle accident and one of them is seriously injured. Does the spouse have the right to make decisions for the injured person?
I think that is the most logical way they could rule. After all it has always been that way, with states having different age requirements or some states allowing first cousins to marry. I have never heard of a state failing to recognize a marriage of first cousins when performed in another state.
 
Old 05-28-2015, 05:28 PM
 
Location: Home is Where You Park It
23,856 posts, read 13,644,508 times
Reputation: 15481
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzy jeff View Post
I think that is the most logical way they could rule. After all it has always been that way, with states having different age requirements or some states allowing first cousins to marry. I have never heard of a state failing to recognize a marriage of first cousins when performed in another state.

Well, that's exactly the question before the court, isn't it? Does the 14th amendment require a state that bans SSM to recognize a legally-performed SSM from another state?

If SCOTUS answers yes, then residents of states that don't allow SSM will just go to another state to get married. When they come back, their state of residence will have to recognize them as married. That's an economic opportunity for some cities - to become a regional version of Reno.
 
Old 05-28-2015, 06:32 PM
 
Location: From Denver, CO to Hong Kong China
900 posts, read 372,345 times
Reputation: 389
^^ The Supreme Court would have to be very amateur to make such a decision, because in theory compel a state to recognize same-sex marriage from another state, it would be the same as forcing him to legalize it, you would only create a substantial burden for same-sex couples, to go to another state to get married and return, and this constitutes discrimination, as heterosexual couples would not be forced to move, and SCOTUS would have to rule again.

For me will be 5-4 in favor of the right of homosexual couples to marry, if Robert purchase the issue of sexual discrimination is a 6-3 ... After so many decisions against the right of states you really think the Supreme Court will rule in favor of the right of states, Obamacare, abortion, interracial marriage, all this came at the cost of states' rights.
 
Old 05-28-2015, 07:24 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
8,464 posts, read 10,878,370 times
Reputation: 10705
Quote:
Originally Posted by YanMarcs View Post
^^ The Supreme Court would have to be very amateur to make such a decision, because in theory compel a state to recognize same-sex marriage from another state, it would be the same as forcing him to legalize it, you would only create a substantial burden for same-sex couples, to go to another state to get married and return, and this constitutes discrimination, as heterosexual couples would not be forced to move, and SCOTUS would have to rule again.

For me will be 5-4 in favor of the right of homosexual couples to marry, if Robert purchase the issue of sexual discrimination is a 6-3 ... After so many decisions against the right of states you really think the Supreme Court will rule in favor of the right of states, Obamacare, abortion, interracial marriage, all this came at the cost of states' rights.
When it comes to the fourteenth amendment, the constitution trumps states rights.
As stated in a previous post, states can not adopt laws that pick and choose who the law applies to, and who the law doesn't apply too.

All laws must(according to the United States constitution) be equal in their treatment.
An individual state is going against the direct order written into the fourteenth amendment if it fails to recognize ssm from another state.
The amendment states, "no state shall adopt laws that discriminate".
The buzz words here are, "No State".

I don''t believe, with clear conscience, any member of the highest court in the land could possibly rule against the directive stated in the fourteenth amendment.
I don't believe it will be a split decision at all.
It is clearly a black and white case.

The fourteenth amendment either stands as written in the constitution, or the court rules it vague and unenforceable.
In the case of the latter, that would open the door to a constitutional amendment changing the wording of the amendment.

I don't think that is going to happen.
 
Old 05-28-2015, 08:10 PM
 
Location: From Denver, CO to Hong Kong China
900 posts, read 372,345 times
Reputation: 389
I understand, what most annoys me all this, are people believe that in fact the judges made their head on the issue only when she was called in court, everyone here already knows how some will vote, kennedy probably already has his vote in your head, what happened in court in April, for me it was just a big theater and a act.
 
Old 05-29-2015, 06:58 AM
 
Location: Midwest City, Oklahoma
14,858 posts, read 8,158,350 times
Reputation: 4590
Quote:
Originally Posted by YanMarcs View Post
I understand, what most annoys me all this, are people believe that in fact the judges made their head on the issue only when she was called in court, everyone here already knows how some will vote, kennedy probably already has his vote in your head, what happened in court in April, for me it was just a big theater and a act.

Exactly, and Jefferson explained this 200 years ago...

"To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem [good justice is broad jurisdiction], and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves."


So the question is, when the Supreme Court makes the ruling that you know they will make, will you just accept it? What can even be done?
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top