SCOTUS Hears Gay Marriage Cases

[ironbite]

Thanks to a huge get out the vote effort by the Mormon Cult of Latter Day Conmen.

[Rabbit of Caerbannog]

Here's an article on how such a politically-charged Court might rule on Prop 8. One should always take articles like this with a grain of salt, however.

[Meshakhad]

From my reading of the case, I think we're most likely to see SCOTUS either just deny standing, or make a narrow ruling. I very much doubt they'll uphold Prop 8, but it's also unlikely that they'll make a broad ruling.

Of course, if they make a narrow ruling, then I think the logical approach for gay marriage advocates is to sue somewhere else, preferably in a state that never granted gay marriage in the first place. Although seeing their waffling, I'm no longer quite sure that they would make a nationwide ruling given a lack of other options.

[Julian]

Hell even in the land of cheese-eating surrender monkeys* not everyone is on board with the idea of gays and lesbians being human beings who deserve the same rights as heterosexuals.


*I'm French and therefore I can say that. I'm pretty sure that's how that works.

Well to be fair, a lot of those douchebags are also against other groups of heterosexuals having the same sets of rights when it comes to other issues.

America by no means has a monopoly on assholes, bigots and morons.

Frankly they should bus them in every three months to have a big cry, and let everyone laugh at their lame asses until their shampaign runs out of money. It's not all funded by the Catholic church, even if they're the ones doing 90% of the pushing in the background to get asses off seats.

Are they still censoring what posters people are allowed to bring?

[Rabbit of Caerbannog]

From my reading of the case, I think we're most likely to see SCOTUS either just deny standing, or make a narrow ruling. I very much doubt they'll uphold Prop 8, but it's also unlikely that they'll make a broad ruling.

Of course, if they make a narrow ruling, then I think the logical approach for gay marriage advocates is to sue somewhere else, preferably in a state that never granted gay marriage in the first place. Although seeing their waffling, I'm no longer quite sure that they would make a nationwide ruling given a lack of other options.

Well if a lawsuit were started now in a state that does not offer same-sex marriages at all, it would still take at least a few years to make it to the Supreme Court. Remember, the Perry case began in 2009, and the Court's opinion will be revealed in June of this year. This would give ample time for more states to legalize it by legislation or ballot measure, as well as for more people (especially Republicans) to cross over to the pro-equality side. That might give the Court the push it needs.

EDIT: We finally have the audio for the Defense of Marriage Act arguments.

[Rabbit of Caerbannog]

And Bill O'Reilly dismissed gay marriage opponents as "Bible thumpers". You can't explain that.

[kefkaownsall]

Flip flop from a guy who said that it would lead to people marrying dolphins

[Damen]

So, has Kennedy found his balls yet?

[dpareja]

Flip flop from a guy who said that it would lead to people marrying dolphins

I suspect that he still opposes gay marriage, he just thinks that the arguments put forward, being primarily based on Christian doctrine, are weak, and that sticking to those arguments will lead to gay marriage becoming the law of the land.

(Ugh, posted this in the wrong thread...)

[Rabbit of Caerbannog]

So, has Kennedy found his balls yet?

Only in this Onion version of the oral arguments.

[m52nickerson]

I think they strike down DOMA but up hold prop 8, basically making what defines a marriage as a state issue.   

[TheUnknown]

Was it Prop 8 in California that was found unconstitutional not because refusing gay marriage is a wrong, but because you can't take away rights that have already been given?  Or was that another state?  If the former, then it'll have horrible, horrible implications if it's upheld. 

[Rabbit of Caerbannog]

I think they strike down DOMA but up hold prop 8, basically making what defines a marriage as a state issue.

I sincerely doubt they'll uphold it. Most likely they'll dismiss it over the standing issue, letting the Ninth Circuit decision stand.

[Rabbit of Caerbannog]

Was it Prop 8 in California that was found unconstitutional not because refusing gay marriage is a wrong, but because you can't take away rights that have already been given?  Or was that another state?  If the former, then it'll have horrible, horrible implications if it's upheld.

Yeah that's California. Judge Walker's ruling was broad, striking down bans on same-sex marriage as unconstitutional in general, but the Ninth Circuit issued a much more narrow ruling which stated that you cannot grant a right such as marriage and then revoke that right.

[Meshakhad]

Flip flop from a guy who said that it would lead to people marrying dolphins

I suspect that he still opposes gay marriage, he just thinks that the arguments put forward, being primarily based on Christian doctrine, are weak, and that sticking to those arguments will lead to gay marriage becoming the law of the land.

(Ugh, posted this in the wrong thread...)

According to the article, O'Reilly supports civil unions, and thinks marriage should be left to the states.