United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Supreme Court extends same-sex marriage nationwide
Source:
AP
URL Source: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie ... AULT&CTIME=2015-06-26-10-02-52
Published: Jun 26, 2015
Author: AP staff
Post Date: 2015-06-26 10:23:13 by redleghunter
Keywords: None
Views: 8953
Comments: 101
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court declared Friday that same-sex couples have a right to marry anywhere in the United States. Gay and lesbian couples already could marry in 36 states and the District of Columbia. The court's 5-4 ruling means the remaining 14 states, in the South and Midwest, will have to stop enforcing their bans on same-sex marriage. Poster Comment: No surprises.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All, *Religious History and Issues* (#0)
Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)
It's a dark week for the nation and the Constitution. If we weren't in a post- Constitutional America before ;we are now . Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Anthony Kennedy should be awarded a swastika to wear on his robe. Is there any president over the decades who has ever done more to radically alter American life than Kennedy? I don't think even the Warren Court did as much damage as Kennedy has done over the decades.
State laws and state constitutions be damned. The justices decided gay marriage was a constitutionally protected federal right and that this right also applied to all the states. Wow. Talk about overreaching. I am speechless.
Make it three swastikas -- including the black, the rainbow, and one red swastika for the blood of millions of murdered babies drenching his black robe. Is there any president over the decades who has ever done more to radically alter American life than Kennedy? Nope. THE deciding swing vote on seemingly every crucial SC verdict.
The big let down for all the fags will be the next big case, where a religious institution refuses to marry two pickle kissers and the USSC upholds the constitutional right to religion. I figured, based on the wording of the 14th, the highest court was gonna force states to be forced to at least grant the license... but physically forcing a priest, pastor or chaplain to conduct such an OBAMAnation... will be the real fight for fags. After that, religions will be considered "hate groups"... and not religions. It shall be interesting as we are forced to walk down this fudge packing path. Every society gets the kind of criminal it deserves. What is equally true is that every community gets the kind of law enforcement it insists on. Robert Kennedy
I have already thought about this too....it's coming.
No, there isn't is there? This process to turn America into Sodom has NEVER turned to the legislative votes. Funny, huh? Fix was in. AS USUAL. This is judicial anarchy. The Left has a monopoly on subversive representation. And shouldn't the three pro-gay radical witches on the SC have recused themselves? FIVE judges now overturned the will of We The People. Just ahead of this were the SIX who promoted the unconstitutional 0dingaCare as legal. The three branches of government ( the supposed "checks and balances" processes of this so-called Republic) are a charade, a sham, and disgraceful bodies of corruption.
The darkest day for the court was Roe v. Wade. Since then they have been making 'moral' life and death decisions. R v. W the SCOTUS opened the door to define when human life begins or does not begin. What is or is not human life. How much lower could the nation go than R v. W? So adding sodomy to their kit bag when murder was already the biggest millstone around their neck, does not surprise me at all. God help us all. Maranatha! Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)
Just think, the filthy fudge packing, nasty cock gobbling Meguro, can't even celebrate here. Such a shame. lol
Every society gets the kind of criminal it deserves. What is equally true is that every community gets the kind of law enforcement it insists on. Robert Kennedy
Since then they have been making 'moral' life and death decisions. R v. W the SCOTUS opened the door to define when human life begins or does not begin. What is or is not human life. How much lower could the nation go than R v. W? Without a doubt the darkest day. It legalized murder of the unborn -- the most innocent of human life. Adding sodomy to their kit bag when murder was already the biggest millstone around their neck, does not surprise me at all. Nope, no surprise at all. Anti-Christian, anti-God Liberals, leftists, and the secular humanist narcissists are gleeful, wallowing in their own graves, celebrating. God will help us individually; As a nation, we are cursed. His hammer of justice and Satan's untied hands will befall America like it's never seen.
HA! But we know he is reading this with absolute glee, celebrating in his favorite underground Japanese bathhouse.
I give it three months, if that, before the gay lobby finds ways to sue churches who refuse to 'marry' gays. The law suits are coming no matter what people say is 'impossible' because of the 1st Amendment. This court does not care for the letter of the law as we saw this week with Obolocare. They will find a way to make the 14th amendment interpret the 1st. They will do the same with the 2nd amendment too. The 10th amendment was just scrapped with this decision and the obolocare decision. So cross off #10 of the Bill of Rights if you are keeping score at home. Might as well cross off #9 as that was abandoned decades ago. So churches be warned. The gay lobby is coming for your elders, pastors, priests and rabbis. Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)
2 Thessalonians 2: Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, 2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. 3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. 5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, 12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. 13 But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God from the beginning chose you for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth, 14 to which He called you by our gospel, for the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle. 16 Now may our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and our God and Father, who has loved us and given us everlasting consolation and good hope by grace, 17 comfort your hearts and establish you in every good word and work. Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)
Can't wait for the reactions from the GOP 2016 field. Have not looked but I gather all will give some luke warm approval to the decision and breathe a sigh that they don't have to 'worry' about this on the campaign trail. I'll take a guess the only three who come out strongly against this are Santorum, Perry, and Cruz. Probably in that order. Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)
Yesterday, the Republican Party gave us Obamacare, via the Supreme Court which they control. Today, the Republican Party gave us universal gay marriage, via the Republican Supreme Court. Let the excuses for the Republicans begin to flow. But know this: they are all lies. The Republicans appointed the judges that gave us Roe v Wade, and the Republicans controlled the court that expanded Roe v Wade, and the Republicans gave us Kelo, and Obamacare and gay marriage. That is the legacy of the Republican Party since 1973: being the final, decisive political force that enacted abortion, property confiscation, socialized medicine and gay marriage into constitutional law. Now listen to all of the Republican rubes howl about the Democrats. It's comical.
And Republicans were the decisive votes that made it happen. You always know what the Democrats are going to do. And if you pay attention, you always know that the Republicans will ratify it. They'll put up a fight, but in the end enough Republicans are always there to make it happen. A vote for Republicans is a vote for having Democrat policies while being able to pretend that you oppose them. That's all it is.
You'll know how that will turn out if the dictators of the Supreme Court force the Little Sisters of the Poor to fund abortion coverage. Heil, Kennedy!
Not as comical as your jihad against the GOP, the only force defending the unborn against unlimited abortion and defending marriage against pervs. You secretly agree with these Court decisions. You're an Anthony Kennedy type. More "Catholic than the pope" but more Lefty than Earl Warren. You don't fool anyone here.
He might sign up just to crow.
I agree 100%. The subversive 14A is THE bloody sledgehammer that destroys freedom (in the name of "promoting" it.) The neo-Fascist Amerikan State aims to crash God's House. It won't turn out well.
See above quote from later in the posted article. I remember you mentioning, I believe, on LP this a year ago. That the number of homosexuals actually seeking 'marriage' was a small population. Seems UCLA did some stats on this. Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)
Amen!
That is the legacy of the Republican Party since 1973: being the final, decisive political force that enacted abortion, property confiscation, socialized medicine and gay marriage into constitutional law. Now listen to all of the Republican rubes howl about the Democrats. It's comical. I cannot argue your approach as GOP presidents DID appoint the left leaning justices. The other question is how long can Catholic bishops keep giving communion to the 6 justices who are Roman Catholic? John Roberts (Chief Justice) Roman Catholic G.W. Bush 2005 Antonin Scalia Roman Catholic Reagan 1986 Anthony Kennedy Roman Catholic Reagan 1988 Clarence Thomas Roman Catholic G.H.W. Bush 1991 Ruth Bader Ginsburg Jewish Clinton 1993 Stephen Breyer Jewish Clinton 1994 Samuel Alito Roman Catholic G.W. Bush 2006 Sonia Sotomayor Roman Catholic Obama 2009 Elena Kagan Jewish Obama 2010 Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)
Whomever amongst the gazillion GOP candidates does NOT is not worth a thin dime. I can see Cruz and Santorum. What -- no Bush?? ;-)
You're a lousy mindreader. Gay marriage is not marriage. I do not agree that the Constitution protects it at all. The ObamaCare statute was written as it was written. That is what the legislature passed. I am certain that we need universal single payer health insurance, as they have in France. And I am certain that the government needs to operate that program. I am also certain that ObamaCare is not the way to do it, and that the Supreme Court wrongly applied the law. I oppose Kelo. I think that the takings clause applies exclusively to the taking of private land for a government purpose, and that it is a theft and abuse of government power to take private land for private purposes using government power. I oppose Roe. Abortion is murder and should be so considered by the Supreme Court. Abortion is unconstitutional: it is the taking of an innocent life without conviction of a capital crime. Four Republican Court decisions, all of which I do not "secretly agree with". I openly oppose. I also oppose the Republican Party on free trade. It has destroyed the American industrial base and put workers out of work. I oppose the Republican Party's tax regimes. I opposed the Republican Party on TARP and TALF and the bank bailouts that enriched bankers and impoverished everybody else. I opposed the Republican Party when they rewrote bankruptcy laws at the start of the crisis specifically to nail individual citizens to the cross while vastly enhancing the power and rights of the institutions which the Republicans then bailed out with TARP and TALF. I oppose the Republican Party in their endless overseas wars that always fail. I oppose the Republican Party for approving Obama's Fast Track. I oppose the Republican Party for granting illegals amnesty under Reagan, and then for leaving the borders open and conniving at replacing American workers ever since. I oppose the Republican Party because they are incompetent assholes who lose wars, kill people, have completely corrupted the government, and because the Supreme Court they've controlled since Nixon gave us Abortion, and doubled down on it, and Kelo, and Gay Marriage, and ObamaCare. I stand up to individual Republicans, because Republicans who oppose all of these things that the Republicans do but refuse to see it as as blind and stupid as inner city Blacks who vote for Democrats who screw them over and over again. White Republicans and Black urban Democrats have a lot in common: willful blindness is at the top. I oppose the Democrats because they are babykillers. I oppose the Democrats because their idea of running schools is Greek: lavish benefits but protect bad performers from consequences. I oppose the Democrats because they want those borders left open in order to replace the electorate. I oppose both parties because they both suck. But the Republicans have controlled the Supreme Court since I was six, and the very worst, fixed, unchangeable features of America have all been nailed down and cemented in concrete by the REPUBLICAN Party, not the Democrats, through the Republican Supreme Court. You say "You don't fool anyone here". YOU are the fool here, for pretending to yourself that the Republicans are pro-life. No. Their Court gave us Roe, and Casey, and now just gave us Obamacare. You're loyal to the Republicans, and they stand for things you oppose. You refuse to acknowledge it, ever. You fool lots of people. You pretend to be pro life, but you support the Party of Roe, of Casey and of Obamacare. The SUPREME COURT imposed those things forever, and the SUPREME COURTS that did it were all controlled by Republicans, who could have stopped those things, but instead cast them in the iron and concrete of Supreme Court opinions. I point it out. And you pretend that I'm the villain for point out that the Republicans are, in FACT, the villains. You're a villain because you're a Republican, and because you try to hide how evil they are, and because you come after me every time I tell the truth. You should be agreeing with me and we should be walking together. Instead, you support the Republicans, who GAVE US ABORTION, and GAY RIGHTS, and OBAMACARE, and KELO, and FAST TRACK. You know how you Republicans always mewl and puke about how Democrats do this and that? Well, your REPUBLICAN officials are the ones who cast all of the final decisions.
Now listen to all of the Republican rubes howl about the Democrats. It's comical. You always return to a Dem = GOP meme. It's not that simple. It has been the leadership establishment of the GOP that has been responsible for GOP fecklessness and collaboration with the satanic Dems. 25-50% of the GOP have consistent been pro-life, pro-family; 0% of the Dems. You have been maligning, indicting, judging, then sentencing GOP conservatives. This is not right nor based on truth.
Unlike you, I'm not locked into the republican/democrat paradigm. This is a one party country with two branches - just for show. But in the kabuki dance we call politics, here's how I see it. The democrats act as the "shock troops" They're the advancing army.(if you call destroying a culture "advancing). They're the ones who take the figurative bullets when they take new territory. When the hayseeds and the rubes (i.e. the people) have had enough, they then turn to the republicans. The republicans, however, are not an opposition party (as some seem to think). The are, rather, the "occupying army." The occupy the territory, and solidify the gains the dems have made. And the cycle then repeats. Over and over.
yes there is a talk show host here who said SCOTUS did the GOP a huge favor in the last 2 days . Now they don't have to scramble to find a fix for the subsidies Now they don't have to make a public position on homosexual marriage. Make them take a stand for religious liberty . Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Gee, I wonder if this ruling will encourage the Moslem (pigpiss be unto them) death cult to ponder increasing tolerance? Can't wait to see how black churches and death-cult mosques will react to the democRats trying to press the issue.
5 or 6 un-elected justices out of a nation of over 300 million do NOT represent "us."
Do statistics provide THE REAL Red Flag and enemy?? Number of Catholics on the US Supreme Court: 6 Conspicuous to say the least.
But their "religion" is secular humanism. Across the board, the occupying subversives within the political arena, academe and media have redefined the language, ergo "slavery" is now redefined as "liberty." All bets are off.
Besides abortion. What do you oppose the democrats on? Say they all changed to pro life. Would you then support them over Republicans?
Today, the Republican Party gave us universal gay marriage, via the Republican Supreme Court. You sure do spin. Reagan nominated Bork, then Ginsburn. then Kennedy slipped it. The only opposition to the faggots is from Republicans. ' You write well but you sure are wrong a lot.
Libertator: the buck stops with the Captain of the Ship. If a ship runs aground in the night because the Officer of the Deck read the charts wrong, it's the junior officer's fault, of course, but it's also the Captain's fault for not training the JO, for letting him have the watch when he wasn't prepared. The Captain of the ship cannot escape liability for what his lieutenants do. Do you EVER see Democrat Supreme Court justices are major politicians break ranks on any important issue, ever. EVER? Do they EVER suddenly betray the principles of their party? Ever? Name me an instance where a Democrat Supreme Court justices has suddenly surprised everybody by turning on his or her party? Name me a time, in a vote on anything crucial, where a Democrat ever defaulted? It hasn't happened once in my adult life. Democrats keep discipline. They do not allow people into positions of decision and leadership who do not have the discipline to stand for what the party stands for. They campaign on things, and then when elected they bull forward and DO what they said they were going to do. I don't like a lot of things they do, but I acknowledge their discipline. I acknowledge that their politicians tell the truth about what they're after, and their justices don't hide who and what they are. They say it, they do it, and they bull forward to the finish line if they can. If they are defeated, it is never because some Democrat Supreme Court justice stabs them in the back, or there are a bunch of insurgent Democrats who bring down the President or his party. It never, ever, ever has happened, not even once, in all of the years I have been voting. The Republicans PRETEND that it happens to them all the time. They pretend that Republican Presidents appoint justices but "who knows what the Justices will do"? Who could have predicted? Well, I can predict. And I'm usually right. What I will predict is that the Democrats never, ever, ever, ever, have even one justice who suddenly betrays them and turns on them and torpedoes their platform. It doesn't happen. With Republicans, it happened with abortion (twice), and property rights, and gay marriage, and ObamaCare (twice). Over and over again it happens, and it always happens on the MOST CRITICAL THINGS. When the chips are down and, say, the Republicans are about to force conservatives onto the appeals courts, "suddenly" 4 Republican Senators break ranks and form the "gang of this or that", and the actual victory is lost. But then, do the Republicans DISCIPLINE the Senators who do that? No. Then, in the next election cycle, the Republicans make the guy who torpedoed the conservative court packing policy their friggin' NOMINEE. But you expect people to not hold the REPUBLICAN PARTY accountable for what the leading, powerful Republicans actually DO over and over. You say that we are wrong for maligning the Republican Party for what the Captains of the Ship DO, again and again. Your position is nuts. It's simply nuts. You have affiliated yourself with the Republican Party and given it too much of your heart and soul. Essentially, you've married a cheating wife, and you're ready to beat up anybody who points it out to you. Well, you have. The Republican Party is your harlot wife. The Captains of the Ship fail you, but you still think that, somehow, the galley crew down shoveling coal in the hold is the REAL ship, and that the ship should not be all accountable for the decisions of its leadership. The truth about ships is that when they run into reefs and sink, the crew in the hold all drown too. The Republican Party cannot escape vilification for what its Senators and Supreme Court Justices and Presidents and Congressional leaders do. That IS the Republican Party. Conversatives who cling to them and get the back of the hand all the time are NOT the REAL Republicans. Roberts and Kennedy and Boehner and McConnell and McCain, the real men in real power with the real titles and the real control - THEY are the Republican Party. Republicans like you are just battered girlfriends and cuckolded husbands who don't want to hear or know the truth. You're damned right I malign and vilify the Republicans. Look at what they have DONE. I vilify the rank and file Republicans who won't break ranks with the GOP for being foolish thralls. If you value what you believe in, you need to scrape your Republican Party affiliation off your boots like the shit that it is and stand up and be an independent man. Lay down with dogs, get up with fleas. That's the way it is. You cannot change the Republican ship, but you can stop sailing on it. You choose not to, pretending that its yours. The lawn boy at the country club is there everyday and gets to eat in the back of the clubhouse, but he is not a member and never will be. And that's you in the Republican Party. Get the hell out of there. It's beneath you to keep affiliating with those turds. They're NEVER going to listen to you, because they ARE, in fact, Romney and McCain, Boehner and McConnel and Graham and Roberts and Kennedy. That's the GOP. It's not going to ever be different. Yelling at ME for telling you the truth: Republicans are scum bunks, is willful blindness. Open your eyes, and see, and walk out of there. Reclaim your manhood and your pride. Stop lying down with dogs. Stop defending them. The Captain of the Ship is responsible. The Republican Ship has SHOWN you its colors again and again. You're not going to mutiny and take over. Get off that ship.
The Catholic Bishops will keep doing it forever. They're wrong, and the institutional Church has lost its way, just as it did back in the middle ages. Perhaps Christianity lost its way when it institutionalized. It does not seem to serve Christ very well to have sunk all of that money into buildings and lands and vestments and high salaries for priest and preachers. That wasn't how the Apostles lived, or Jesus. They would have taken all that money spent on those things and gained sheep for the flock by feeding the poor. Perhaps that's the problem with the Church, and the churches, all along. They want to be career paths. But they're not intended to be that.
That's it in a nutshell. The GOP faithful are more dishonest, that's the only difference.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf PDF: SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus OBERGEFELL ET AL. v. HODGES, DIRECTOR, OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT No. 14–556. Argued April 28, 2015—Decided June 26, 2015* Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio, and Tennessee define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. The petitioners, 14 same-sex couples and two men whose same-sex partners are deceased, filed suits in Federal District Courts in their home States, claiming that respondent state officials violate the Fourteenth Amendment by denying them the right to marry or to have marriages lawfully performed in another State given full recognition. Each District Court ruled in petitioners’ favor, but the Sixth Circuit consolidated the cases and reversed. Held: The Fourteenth Amendment requires a State to license a marriage between two people of the same sex and to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-State. Pp. 3–28. (a) Before turning to the governing principles and precedents, it isappropriate to note the history of the subject now before the Court. Pp. 3–10. (1) The history of marriage as a union between two persons of the opposite sex marks the beginning of these cases. To the respondents, it would demean a timeless institution if marriage were extended to same-sex couples. But the petitioners, far from seeking to devalue marriage, seek it for themselves because of their respect—and need—for its privileges and responsibilities, as illustrated by the pe- - - - *Together with No. 14–562, Tanco et al. v. Haslam, Governor of Tennessee, et al., No. 14–571, DeBoer et al. v. Snyder, Governor of Michigan, et al., and No. 14–574, Bourke et al. v. Beshear, Governor of Kentucky, also on certiorari to the same court. - - - - - [2] titioners’ own experiences. Pp. 3–6. (2) The history of marriage is one of both continuity and change. Changes, such as the decline of arranged marriages and the abandonment of the law of coverture, have worked deep transformations in the structure of marriage, affecting aspects of marriage once viewed as essential. These new insights have strengthened, not weakened, the institution. Changed understandings of marriage are characteristic of a Nation where new dimensions of freedom become apparent to new generations. This dynamic can be seen in the Nation’s experience with gay and lesbian rights. Well into the 20th century, many States condemned same-sex intimacy as immoral, and homosexuality was treated as an illness. Later in the century, cultural and political developments allowed same-sex couples to lead more open and public lives. Extensive public and private dialogue followed, along with shifts in public attitudes. Questions about the legal treatment of gays and lesbians soonreached the courts, where they could be discussed in the formal discourse of the law. In 2003, this Court overruled its 1986 decision in Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U. S. 186, which upheld a Georgia law thatcriminalized certain homosexual acts, concluding laws making same-sex intimacy a crime “demea[n] the lives of homosexual persons.” Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U. S. 558, 575. In 2012, the federal Defense of Marriage Act was also struck down. United States v. Windsor, 570 U. S. ___. Numerous same-sex marriage cases reaching the federalcourts and state supreme courts have added to the dialogue. Pp. 6– 10. (b) The Fourteenth Amendment requires a State to license a marriage between two people of the same sex. Pp. 10–27. (1) The fundamental liberties protected by the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause extend to certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy, including intimate choices defining personal identity and beliefs. See, e.g., Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U. S. 438, 453; Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U. S. 479, 484–486. Courts must exercise reasoned judgment in identifying interests of the person so fundamental that the State must accord them its respect. History and tradition guide and discipline the inquiry but do not set its outer boundaries. When new insight reveals discord between the Constitution’s central protections and a received legal stricture, a claim to liberty must be addressed. Applying these tenets, the Court has long held the right to marry is protected by the Constitution. For example, Loving v. Virginia, 388 U. S. 1, 12, invalidated bans on interracial unions, and Turner v. Safley, 482 U. S. 78, 95, held that prisoners could not be denied the right to marry. To be sure, these cases presumed a relationship in- - - - - - [3] volving opposite-sex partners, as did Baker v. Nelson, 409 U. S. 810, a one-line summary decision issued in 1972, holding that the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage did not present a substantial federal question. But other, more instructive precedents have expressed broader principles. See, e.g., Lawrence, supra, at 574. In assessing whether the force and rationale of its cases apply to same-sex couples, the Court must respect the basic reasons why the right to marry has been long protected. See, e.g., Eisenstadt, supra, at 453–454. This analysis compels the conclusion that same-sex couples may exercise the right to marry. Pp. 10–12. (2) Four principles and traditions demonstrate that the reasons marriage is fundamental under the Constitution apply withequal force to same-sex couples. The first premise of this Court’s relevant precedents is that the right to personal choice regarding marriage is inherent in the concept of individual autonomy. This abiding connection between marriage and liberty is why Loving invalidated interracial marriage bans under the Due Process Clause. See 388 U.S., at 12. Decisions about marriage are among the most intimatethat an individual can make. See Lawrence, supra, at 574. This is true for all persons, whatever their sexual orientation. A second principle in this Court’s jurisprudence is that the right tomarry is fundamental because it supports a two-person union unlike any other in its importance to the committed individuals. The intimate association protected by this right was central to Griswold v. Connecticut, which held the Constitution protects the right of married couples to use contraception, 381 U. S., at 485, and was acknowledged in Turner, supra, at 95. Same-sex couples have the same rightas opposite-sex couples to enjoy intimate association, a right extending beyond mere freedom from laws making same-sex intimacy acriminal offense. See Lawrence, supra, at 567. A third basis for protecting the right to marry is that it safeguards children and families and thus draws meaning from related rights of childrearing, procreation, and education. See, e.g., Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U. S. 510. Without the recognition, stability, and predictability marriage offers, children suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser. They also suffer the significant material costs of being raised by unmarried parents, relegated to a more difficult and uncertain family life. The marriage laws at issue thus harm and humiliate the children of same-sex couples. See Windsor, supra, at ___. This does not mean that the right to marry isless meaningful for those who do not or cannot have children. Precedent protects the right of a married couple not to procreate, so the right to marry cannot be conditioned on the capacity or commitment to procreate. [4] Finally, this Court’s cases and the Nation’s traditions make clear that marriage is a keystone of the Nation’s social order. See Maynard v. Hill, 125 U. S. 190, 211. States have contributed to the fundamental character of marriage by placing it at the center of many facets of the legal and social order. There is no difference between same- and opposite-sex couples with respect to this principle,yet same-sex couples are denied the constellation of benefits that the States have linked to marriage and are consigned to an instability many opposite-sex couples would find intolerable. It is demeaning to lock same-sex couples out of a central institution of the Nation’s society, for they too may aspire to the transcendent purposes of marriage. The limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples may long have seemed natural and just, but its inconsistency with the central meaning of the fundamental right to marry is now manifest. Pp. 12–18. (3) The right of same-sex couples to marry is also derived from the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection. The Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause are connected in a profound way. Rights implicit in liberty and rights secured by equal protection may rest on different precepts and are not always coextensive, yet each may be instructive as to the meaning and reach of the other. This dynamic is reflected in Loving, where the Court invoked both the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause; and in Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U. S. 374, where the Court invalidated a law barring fathers delinquent on child-support payments from marrying. Indeed, recognizing that new insights and societal understandings can reveal unjustified inequality within fundamental institutions that once passed unnoticed and unchallenged, this Court has invoked equal protection principles to invalidate laws imposing sex-based inequality on marriage, see, e.g., Kirchberg v. Feenstra, 450 U.S. 455, 460–461, and confirmed the relation between liberty and equality, see, e.g., M. L. B. v. S. L. J., 519 U. S. 102, 120–121. The Court has acknowledged the interlocking nature of these constitutional safeguards in the context of the legal treatment of gays and lesbians. See Lawrence, 539 U. S., at 575. This dynamic also applies to same-sex marriage. The challenged laws burden the liberty of same-sex couples, and they abridge central precepts of equality.The marriage laws at issue are in essence unequal: Same-sex couples are denied benefits afforded opposite-sex couples and are barred from exercising a fundamental right. Especially against a long history of disapproval of their relationships, this denial works a grave and continuing harm, serving to disrespect and subordinate gays and lesbians. Pp. 18–22. (4) The right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protec - - - - - [5] tion Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same-sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty. Same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry. Baker v. Nelson is overruled. The State laws challenged by the petitioners in these cases are held invalid to the extent they exclude same-sex couples from civil marriage on the same terms and conditions as opposite-sex couples. Pp. 22–23. (5) There may be an initial inclination to await further legislation, litigation, and debate, but referenda, legislative debates, and grassroots campaigns; studies and other writings; and extensive litigation in state and federal courts have led to an enhanced understanding of the issue. While the Constitution contemplates that democracy is the appropriate process for change, individuals who are harmed need not await legislative action before asserting a fundamental right. Bowers, in effect, upheld state action that denied gays and lesbians a fundamental right. Though it was eventually repudiated, men and women suffered pain and humiliation in the interim, and the effects of these injuries no doubt lingered long after Bowers was overruled. A ruling against same-sex couples would have the same effect and would be unjustified under the Fourteenth Amendment. The petitioners’ stories show the urgency of the issue they present to the Court, which has a duty to address these claims andanswer these questions. Respondents’ argument that allowing same-sex couples to wed will harm marriage as an institution rests on a counterintuitive view of opposite-sex couples’ decisions about marriage and parenthood. Finally, the First Amendment ensures that religions, those who adhere to religious doctrines, and others have protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths. Pp. 23–27. (c) The Fourteenth Amendment requires States to recognize same-sex marriages validly performed out of State. Since same-sex couples may now exercise the fundamental right to marry in all States, there is no lawful basis for a State to refuse to recognize a lawful same-sex marriage performed in another State on the ground of its same-sex character. Pp. 27–28. 772 F. 3d 388, reversed. KENNEDY, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which GINSBURG, BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., joined. ROBERTS, C. J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA and THOMAS, JJ., joined. SCALIA, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which THOMAS, J., joined. THOMAS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA, J., joined. ALITO, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA and THOMAS, JJ., joined.
LOL haven't you been paying attention to Hondo's posts:)? Bush and Clinton are the same. Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)
Perhaps that's the problem with the Church, and the churches, all along. They want to be career paths. But they're not intended to be that. I agree. Seemed worship of the 'called out ones' was even done joyfully by a river: Acts 16: 13 And on the Sabbath day we went out of the city to the riverside, where prayer was customarily made; and we sat down and spoke to the women who met there. Simple and practical. A river close so they could baptize! Truly my soul waiteth upon God: from him cometh my salvation. He only is my rock and my salvation; he is my defence; I shall not be greatly moved. (Psalm 62:1-2)
Comments (42 - 101) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: redleghunter, All (#0)
#3. To: redleghunter (#0)
#4. To: redleghunter (#0)
"The Supreme Court declared Friday that same-sex couples have a right to marry anywhere in the United States."
#5. To: TooConservative (#3)
Anthony Kennedy should be awarded a swastika to wear on his robe.
#6. To: misterwhite (#4)
#7. To: GrandIsland, misterwhite (#6)
...where a religious institution refuses to marry...
#8. To: redleghunter (#0)
No surprises.
#9. To: tomder55, TooConservative, liberator, misterwhite, CZ82, GarySpFc, Vicomte13 (#2)
It's a dark week for the nation and the Constitution.
#10. To: Liberator (#8)
#11. To: redleghunter, tomder55, TooConservative, misterwhite, CZ82, GarySpFc, Vicomte13 (#9)
(Edited)
The darkest day for the court was Roe v. Wade.
#12. To: GrandIsland (#10)
(Edited)
#13. To: GrandIsland, liberator, TooConservative, GarySpFc, Vicomte13, BobCeleste, CZ82 (#6)
I figured, based on the wording of the 14th, the highest court was gonna force states to be forced to at least grant the license... but physically forcing a priest, pastor or chaplain to conduct such an OBAMAnation... will be the real fight for fags.
#14. To: Liberator (#11)
God will help us individually; As a nation, we are cursed. His hammer of justice and Satan's untied hands will befall America like it's never seen.
#15. To: tomder55, TooConservative, liberator, misterwhite, CZ82, GarySpFc, Vicomte13, *2016 The Likely Suspects* (#9)
#16. To: redleghunter (#0)
#17. To: Liberator (#8)
FIVE and SIX
#18. To: GrandIsland (#6)
The big let down for all the fags will be the next big case, where a religious institution refuses to marry two pickle kissers and the USSC upholds the constitutional right to religion.
#19. To: Vicomte13 (#16)
Now listen to all of the Republican rubes howl about the Democrats. It's comical.
#20. To: GrandIsland, meguro (#10)
Just think, the filthy fudge packing, nasty cock gobbling Meguro, can't even celebrate here. Such a shame. lol
#21. To: redleghunter, GrandIsland, liberator, TooConservative, GarySpFc, Vicomte13, BobCeleste, CZ82, nolu chan (#13)
I give it three months, if that, before the gay lobby finds ways to sue churches who refuse to 'marry' gays. The law suits are coming no matter what people say is 'impossible' because of the 1st Amendment. This court does not care for the letter of the law as we saw this week with Obolocare. They will find a way to make the 14th amendment interpret the 1st. They will do the same with the 2nd amendment too. The 10th amendment was just scrapped with this decision and the obolocare decision.
#22. To: TooConservative (#3)
There are an estimated 390,000 married same-sex couples in the United States, according to UCLA's Williams Institute, which tracks the demographics of gay and lesbian Americans. Another 70,000 couples living in states that do not currently permit them to wed would get married in the next three years, the institute says. Roughly 1 million same-sex couples, married and unmarried, live together in the United States, the institute says.
#23. To: redleghunter (#14)
#24. To: Vicomte13 (#16)
Let the excuses for the Republicans begin to flow. But know this: they are all lies. The Republicans appointed the judges that gave us Roe v Wade, and the Republicans controlled the court that expanded Roe v Wade, and the Republicans gave us Kelo, and Obamacare and gay marriage.
#25. To: redleghunter (#15)
(Edited)
I'll take a guess the only three who come out strongly against this are Santorum, Perry, and Cruz. Probably in that order.
#26. To: TooConservative (#19)
"You secretly agree with these Court decisions"
#27. To: Vicomte13 (#16)
That is the legacy of the Republican Party since 1973: being the final, decisive political force that enacted abortion, property confiscation, socialized medicine and gay marriage into constitutional law.
#28. To: Vicomte13 (#16)
Now listen to all of the Republican rubes howl about the Democrats. It's comical.
#29. To: TooConservative, liberator, misterwhite, CZ82, GarySpFc, Vicomte13, (#15)
#30. To: redleghunter (#0)
(Edited)
#31. To: Vicomte13 (#17)
And Republicans were the decisive votes that made it happen.
#32. To: redleghunter, Vicomte13 (#24)
I cannot argue your approach as GOP presidents DID appoint the left leaning justices. The other question is how long can Catholic bishops keep giving communion to the 6 justices who are Roman Catholic?
Number of Protestants on the US Supreme Court: ZERO
#33. To: tomder55 (#29)
(Edited)
Make them take a stand for religious liberty .
#34. To: Vicomte13 (#26)
#35. To: Vicomte13 (#16)
Yesterday, the Republican Party gave us Obamacare, via the Supreme Court which they control.
#36. To: Liberator (#27)
#37. To: redleghunter (#24)
#38. To: Vicomte13, GOP, more bull, shuck 'n jive too, *The Two Parties ARE the Same* (#17)
A vote for Republicans is a vote for having Democrat policies while being able to pretend that you oppose them.
#39. To: redleghunter (#1)
01 - Syllabus
06 - Kennedy, for the Court
40 - Roberts, Dissenting
69 - Scalia, Dissenting
78 - Thomas, Dissenting
96 - Alito, Dissenting
103 - END
#40. To: Liberator (#25)
What -- no Bush?? ;-)
#41. To: Vicomte13 (#37)
Perhaps Christianity lost its way when it institutionalized. It does not seem to serve Christ very well to have sunk all of that money into buildings and lands and vestments and high salaries for priest and preachers. That wasn't how the Apostles lived, or Jesus. They would have taken all that money spent on those things and gained sheep for the flock by feeding the poor.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]