Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Has Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. embraced the court's same-sex marriage decision that he so passionately protested two years ago? Maybe he finally met the right person?   ( washingtonpost.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, Supreme Court, Supreme Court of the United States, same-sex couples, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, justices, Samuel Alito, Harvard Law School, Justices Clarence Thomas  
•       •       •

6848 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Jul 2017 at 11:20 AM (13 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



123 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-07-17 10:23:16 AM  
TFA offers nothing but conjecture to support their premise. Dismissed.
 
2017-07-17 10:45:38 AM  
I think the more likely way Roberts has embraced Obergefell's precedent is in doing the absolute bare minimum. Yes, I think he will order states to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. At the same time, I think he will:

* Not require specific individuals to issue/approve marriage licenses to same-sex couples
* Not require government departments outside of the one that issues or approves marriage licenses to recognize marriages of same-sex couples
* Not require states to guarantee any of the constellation of benefits for marriage to same-sex couples
* Not require non-government organizations and/or private citizens to recognize marriages of same-sex couples

And after he's done all of that, he'll finally strike down Obergefell because look at how empty this right of getting a marriage license is!
 
2017-07-17 11:08:36 AM  
does anyone still care? gay marriage is legal and society hasn't collapsed.
 
2017-07-17 11:22:56 AM  

moothemagiccow: does anyone still care? gay marriage is legal and society hasn't collapsed.


People haven't gotten over the Civil Rights Act or the Voting Rights Act, this is going to stick in the craw of crazies for years to come.
 
2017-07-17 11:23:31 AM  

moothemagiccow: does anyone still care?


Yes...many care a whole lot what people do against their own jesus values.
 
2017-07-17 11:25:16 AM  

moothemagiccow: does anyone still care? gay marriage is legal and society hasn't collapsed.


GOP memory is like chewing gum underneath desks. You can pretend it doesn't exist but it will always be there, watching you, dangerously close to your crotch.
 
2017-07-17 11:25:17 AM  
Is there a buttload of puns in that article or am I just looking for that kind of thing?

"passionately protested "
"oral arguments"
"curiosity's sake "
"provide services"
"religiously opposed "

That's just in the first 4 paragraphs.
 
2017-07-17 11:25:22 AM  

moothemagiccow: does anyone still care? gay marriage is legal and society hasn't collapsed.


It's a matter of perspective.  People like the Duggars, Pat Robertson, etc. etc. etc. our times are worse than the last moments of Sodom and Gomorrah.
 
2017-07-17 11:28:16 AM  

moothemagiccow: does anyone still care? gay marriage is legal and society hasn't collapsed.


Pack in guys, discrimination against gays is over! Good news! Nobody cares. You heard it here first, folks.
 
2017-07-17 11:32:56 AM  

moothemagiccow: does anyone still care? gay marriage is legal and society hasn't collapsed.


Maybe not yet, but how far off can we be considering...
img.fark.net
 
2017-07-17 11:35:26 AM  
The long standing problem with the religious right in this country has been that since "homosexuality is a choice", those that engage in such behavior must be deviants.  Because they already consider these people deviants, they must be deviant in other ways.  This has been the long standing opinion, and the source of the bias for decades.

It's taken a long, long time, for people to finally come to grips with the absolute, scientific fact, that homosexuality is NOT a choice at all.  It is biologically wired into a person's brain the same as sexuality is wired into the heterosexual brain.  And at the risk of stating the obvious, homosexuals are no better or worse than any one else.  Yet - there are plenty of examples of repressed ultra conservatives turning out to be the worst examples of deviants the world has ever produced.  Farking hypocrite assholes.

This sort of thing should not be in the Supreme Court any longer.  The fight is over.  No more cases should be entertained.  No more opinions need to be written.  Common sense and science have proved the conservative right to be incorrect, and told to STFU.  So enough of this nonsense already.
 
2017-07-17 11:36:45 AM  

lexnaturalis: moothemagiccow: does anyone still care? gay marriage is legal and society hasn't collapsed.

Pack in guys, discrimination against gays is over! Good news! Nobody cares. You heard it here first, folks.


can't they just fire your strawman?

img.fark.net
 
2017-07-17 11:45:07 AM  

moothemagiccow: does anyone still care? gay marriage is legal and society hasn't collapsed.


Here's why they still go after LGBT people.  It's a great tool for the wealthy/elites to control the rest of society.

I was a history major in college and my professor drew this diagram up on the board (forgive my crude paint skills).  It showed societal control structures before, during and after the civil war in the American south.

At the top, you had the wealthy whites who were a small part of the population but controlled the wealth.  In the middle, you had the largest part of the population, the poor whites.  And at the bottom, you had the slaves.  The poor whites didn't have it much better than the slaves.

So, if you're a rich white person, how do you control/appease the masses and keep from being overthrown?  You denigrate the blacks, so that even if you're a poor white person who is not really any better off than a black person, it gives you a sense of superiority and being better than others to where you will accept your own lowly position in society.

The current Nathaniel Bedford Forrests of the world like Donald Trump are still using this playbook today.

So, some guy in West Virginia with no job, and no health care who is surviving on benefits Trump wants to cut off will still vote for him--because Trump offers him an air of superiority by attacking blacks, Mexicans, Muslims, the LGBT community etc.  It gives him someone else to blame for all his problems.

The Germans did this to the Jews in the 1930's and 1940's.

img.fark.net
 
2017-07-17 11:49:04 AM  

moothemagiccow: does anyone still care? gay marriage is legal and society hasn't collapsed.


There's actually been a serious backlash since the Obergefell decision*.  While this is purely anecdotal, as a paramedic, and talking to PD and volunteers with the Rape Crisis hotlines, there has definitely been an uptick in violence against LGBT people since the decision.  I've personally responded on more so-called "gay bashings" in the last year than I have in the previous five**.

In fact, just three months after Marriage Equality was made federal law, I myself was a victim of a hate-motivated beating because I'd offended a couple of guys for having the audacity to share a romantic slow dance with my boyfriend at a bar/dance club.

There are people out there who, until Marriage Equality, tended to keep their hate to themselves.  Now that we queers can *gasp* get married, there's a segment of the population who is seriously threatened and angry about it.  And they're taking it out on us in a particularly violent way.  True, society hasn't collapsed, just as it didn't after the passage of the Civil Rights Act, but for damned sure there are people out there who care, and not in a good way.

*Obergefell is also why, IMHO, we've seen a rash of so-called "religious freedom" bills being introduced that legalize discrimination against gay people, as well as all these idiotic bathroom laws.

** I haven't seen this kind of focused violence against queer people since the late 80's/early 90's when white supremacists/white christian identity shiatbirds developed a serious bug up their collective asses about gay people.
 
2017-07-17 11:49:43 AM  
Did he decide to reverse his shiatty 5-4's for things like citizens united and a few others.
 
2017-07-17 11:53:48 AM  

durbnpoisn: The long standing problem with the religious right in this country has been that since "homosexuality is a choice", those that engage in such behavior must be deviants.  Because they already consider these people deviants, they must be deviant in other ways.  This has been the long standing opinion, and the source of the bias for decades.

It's taken a long, long time, for people to finally come to grips with the absolute, scientific fact, that homosexuality is NOT a choice at all.  It is biologically wired into a person's brain the same as sexuality is wired into the heterosexual brain.  And at the risk of stating the obvious, homosexuals are no better or worse than any one else.  Yet - there are plenty of examples of repressed ultra conservatives turning out to be the worst examples of deviants the world has ever produced.  Farking hypocrite assholes.

This sort of thing should not be in the Supreme Court any longer.  The fight is over.  No more cases should be entertained.  No more opinions need to be written.  Common sense and science have proved the conservative right to be incorrect, and told to STFU.  So enough of this nonsense already.


What if you're bisexual?
 
2017-07-17 11:54:07 AM  
Every time anything comes up about Thomas I get more pissed, and considering how many years he has been around it really isn't good for my blood pressure.  How that jackass can look at Obergefell vs. Hodges and see Loving vs. Virginia that allowed him to marry his wife I do not understand.  I know he was Scalia's puppet (original intent my Aunt Fanny you cretin) but now he seems to be zombie Scalia's puppet.

Marshall to this piece of crap, what a let down.

Roberts?  Just another comfortable white guy worried what the folks at the church and on the golf course will think.
 
2017-07-17 11:54:21 AM  

aterry33: moothemagiccow: does anyone still care? gay marriage is legal and society hasn't collapsed.

Here's why they still go after LGBT people.  It's a great tool for the wealthy/elites to control the rest of society.

I was a history major in college and my professor drew this diagram up on the board (forgive my crude paint skills).  It showed societal control structures before, during and after the civil war in the American south.

At the top, you had the wealthy whites who were a small part of the population but controlled the wealth.  In the middle, you had the largest part of the population, the poor whites.  And at the bottom, you had the slaves.  The poor whites didn't have it much better than the slaves.

So, if you're a rich white person, how do you control/appease the masses and keep from being overthrown?  You denigrate the blacks, so that even if you're a poor white person who is not really any better off than a black person, it gives you a sense of superiority and being better than others to where you will accept your own lowly position in society.

The current Nathaniel Bedford Forrests of the world like Donald Trump are still using this playbook today.

So, some guy in West Virginia with no job, and no health care who is surviving on benefits Trump wants to cut off will still vote for him--because Trump offers him an air of superiority by attacking blacks, Mexicans, Muslims, the LGBT community etc.  It gives him someone else to blame for all his problems.

The Germans did this to the Jews in the 1930's and 1940's.

[img.fark.net image 819x460]


there is a george carlin bit that covers this as well.  the poors only exist to scare the sh*t outta the middle class.
 
2017-07-17 11:56:29 AM  

durbnpoisn: This sort of thing should not be in the Supreme Court any longer. The fight is over. No more cases should be entertained. No more opinions need to be written. Common sense and science have proved the conservative right to be incorrect, and told to STFU. So enough of this nonsense already.


There are still challenges to the Voting Rights Act, both governments saying let's restrict more, and non-government types (citizens, ACLU, etc) saying we're being suppressed.  Same with Roe v. Wade.  Same with Prohibition and MADD.  Expect the same here, and with any future rulings concerning legalization of drugs.
 
2017-07-17 11:57:20 AM  

RabidRythmDivas: durbnpoisn: The long standing problem with the religious right in this country has been that since "homosexuality is a choice", those that engage in such behavior must be deviants.  Because they already consider these people deviants, they must be deviant in other ways.  This has been the long standing opinion, and the source of the bias for decades.

It's taken a long, long time, for people to finally come to grips with the absolute, scientific fact, that homosexuality is NOT a choice at all.  It is biologically wired into a person's brain the same as sexuality is wired into the heterosexual brain.  And at the risk of stating the obvious, homosexuals are no better or worse than any one else.  Yet - there are plenty of examples of repressed ultra conservatives turning out to be the worst examples of deviants the world has ever produced.  Farking hypocrite assholes.

This sort of thing should not be in the Supreme Court any longer.  The fight is over.  No more cases should be entertained.  No more opinions need to be written.  Common sense and science have proved the conservative right to be incorrect, and told to STFU.  So enough of this nonsense already.

What if you're bisexual?


then you love everybody yet are hated by everybody at the same time.
 
2017-07-17 12:06:18 PM  
Precedent is still precedent.  I was kinda surprised that Roberts dissented in the first place, but now that the decision is there, it would be even sillier to tilt at windmills.
 
2017-07-17 12:09:48 PM  

moothemagiccow: does anyone still care? gay marriage is legal and society hasn't collapsed.


The Texas Supreme Court is currently looking to punch a hole in gay marriage rights wrt benefits payments so yes, people still care.
 
2017-07-17 12:12:30 PM  
There's actually been a serious backlash since the Obergefell decision*.

I totally expected that.  Just look back at the post-civil war era and the passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments.

You could no longer technically keep blacks as slaves or deny them the right to vote, so what did they do?  Jim Crow laws, segregation, poll taxes, the KKK, literacy tests for voting etc.

Gays and Lesbians can get married now.  So what did they do?  Try to mess with their marriage licenses (see Kentucky) stupid bathroom bills to discriminate against transgender people, "religions freedom" laws to allow people to continue to discriminate, and so on.

And they're still going after blacks and other minorities too with the gerry mandering of districts, voter I.D. laws, etc.  If Lincoln saw this crap he'd switch to being a Democrat in a heartbeat.
 
2017-07-17 12:12:57 PM  

durbnpoisn: The long standing problem with the religious right in this country has been that since "homosexuality is a choice", those that engage in such behavior must be deviants.  Because they already consider these people deviants, they must be deviant in other ways.  This has been the long standing opinion, and the source of the bias for decades.

It's taken a long, long time, for people to finally come to grips with the absolute, scientific fact, that homosexuality is NOT a choice at all.  It is biologically wired into a person's brain the same as sexuality is wired into the heterosexual brain.  And at the risk of stating the obvious, homosexuals are no better or worse than any one else.  Yet - there are plenty of examples of repressed ultra conservatives turning out to be the worst examples of deviants the world has ever produced.  Farking hypocrite assholes.

This sort of thing should not be in the Supreme Court any longer.  The fight is over.  No more cases should be entertained.  No more opinions need to be written.  Common sense and science have proved the conservative right to be incorrect, and told to STFU.  So enough of this nonsense already.


The legal system is, in fact, not that simple. No system spanning a continent and trying to fairly govern hundreds of millions of people is going to be. A variety of issues adjacent to the gay marriage question really do need rulings about which way the government ought to fall. You cant just shrug that shiat off.
 
2017-07-17 12:16:32 PM  

BlastFemur: moothemagiccow: does anyone still care? gay marriage is legal and society hasn't collapsed.

Maybe not yet, but how far off can we be considering...
[img.fark.net image 668x501]


Is it my imagination or are there three invisible cocks in that picture?
 
2017-07-17 12:17:28 PM  
Or he's more a fan of state government/bureaucracy obeying the Supreme Court versus hating gay marriage...
 
2017-07-17 12:17:36 PM  

RabidRythmDivas: durbnpoisn: The long standing problem with the religious right in this country has been that since "homosexuality is a choice", those that engage in such behavior must be deviants.  Because they already consider these people deviants, they must be deviant in other ways.  This has been the long standing opinion, and the source of the bias for decades.

It's taken a long, long time, for people to finally come to grips with the absolute, scientific fact, that homosexuality is NOT a choice at all.  It is biologically wired into a person's brain the same as sexuality is wired into the heterosexual brain.  And at the risk of stating the obvious, homosexuals are no better or worse than any one else.  Yet - there are plenty of examples of repressed ultra conservatives turning out to be the worst examples of deviants the world has ever produced.  Farking hypocrite assholes.

This sort of thing should not be in the Supreme Court any longer.  The fight is over.  No more cases should be entertained.  No more opinions need to be written.  Common sense and science have proved the conservative right to be incorrect, and told to STFU.  So enough of this nonsense already.

What if you're bisexual?


Well, that IS a choice, I suppose.  But it's still no one's business but your own.  Still consenting adults?  No one's getting hurt?  Still shouldn't be a legal matter.
 
2017-07-17 12:21:46 PM  

Ned Stark: durbnpoisn: The long standing problem with the religious right in this country has been that since "homosexuality is a choice", those that engage in such behavior must be deviants.  Because they already consider these people deviants, they must be deviant in other ways.  This has been the long standing opinion, and the source of the bias for decades.

It's taken a long, long time, for people to finally come to grips with the absolute, scientific fact, that homosexuality is NOT a choice at all.  It is biologically wired into a person's brain the same as sexuality is wired into the heterosexual brain.  And at the risk of stating the obvious, homosexuals are no better or worse than any one else.  Yet - there are plenty of examples of repressed ultra conservatives turning out to be the worst examples of deviants the world has ever produced.  Farking hypocrite assholes.

This sort of thing should not be in the Supreme Court any longer.  The fight is over.  No more cases should be entertained.  No more opinions need to be written.  Common sense and science have proved the conservative right to be incorrect, and told to STFU.  So enough of this nonsense already.

The legal system is, in fact, not that simple. No system spanning a continent and trying to fairly govern hundreds of millions of people is going to be. A variety of issues adjacent to the gay marriage question really do need rulings about which way the government ought to fall. You cant just shrug that shiat off.


If you drop the notion that there is a difference between same sex couples and not same sex couples, then, yeah, I kinda think you can shrug it off.

I really don't know what sorts of issues face married couples that are a whole lot different just because the couple is a couple of men or a couple of women.
 
2017-07-17 12:25:03 PM  
Chief Justice Roberts is a catholic. He's made no attempts to deceive the public on where his personal faith lies. However, he's also made it abundantly clear that he's only interested in doing his job, not the work of the Lord. He might very well believe homosexuality is a sin and that same-sex marriage is wrong, but he's not an ultra-conservative nutjob like Justice Thomas. I may disagree with his politics, but as a person he's never led me to believe that he can't separate his personal responsibility to the Supreme Court from his personal beliefs. If same sex marriage is the law of the land, then I have every reason to believe that he's capable of supporting that, even if as a private citizen he disagrees with it.
 
2017-07-17 12:27:13 PM  

durbnpoisn: Ned Stark: durbnpoisn: The long standing problem with the religious right in this country has been that since "homosexuality is a choice", those that engage in such behavior must be deviants.  Because they already consider these people deviants, they must be deviant in other ways.  This has been the long standing opinion, and the source of the bias for decades.

It's taken a long, long time, for people to finally come to grips with the absolute, scientific fact, that homosexuality is NOT a choice at all.  It is biologically wired into a person's brain the same as sexuality is wired into the heterosexual brain.  And at the risk of stating the obvious, homosexuals are no better or worse than any one else.  Yet - there are plenty of examples of repressed ultra conservatives turning out to be the worst examples of deviants the world has ever produced.  Farking hypocrite assholes.

This sort of thing should not be in the Supreme Court any longer.  The fight is over.  No more cases should be entertained.  No more opinions need to be written.  Common sense and science have proved the conservative right to be incorrect, and told to STFU.  So enough of this nonsense already.

The legal system is, in fact, not that simple. No system spanning a continent and trying to fairly govern hundreds of millions of people is going to be. A variety of issues adjacent to the gay marriage question really do need rulings about which way the government ought to fall. You cant just shrug that shiat off.

If you drop the notion that there is a difference between same sex couples and not same sex couples, then, yeah, I kinda think you can shrug it off.

I really don't know what sorts of issues face married couples that are a whole lot different just because the couple is a couple of men or a couple of women.


The case in tfa about whether a buisness owner is required to provide service to a gay married couple, for example.
 
2017-07-17 12:30:16 PM  

Hyjamon: RabidRythmDivas: durbnpoisn: The long standing problem with the religious right in this country has been that since "homosexuality is a choice", those that engage in such behavior must be deviants.  Because they already consider these people deviants, they must be deviant in other ways.  This has been the long standing opinion, and the source of the bias for decades.

It's taken a long, long time, for people to finally come to grips with the absolute, scientific fact, that homosexuality is NOT a choice at all.  It is biologically wired into a person's brain the same as sexuality is wired into the heterosexual brain.  And at the risk of stating the obvious, homosexuals are no better or worse than any one else.  Yet - there are plenty of examples of repressed ultra conservatives turning out to be the worst examples of deviants the world has ever produced.  Farking hypocrite assholes.

This sort of thing should not be in the Supreme Court any longer.  The fight is over.  No more cases should be entertained.  No more opinions need to be written.  Common sense and science have proved the conservative right to be incorrect, and told to STFU.  So enough of this nonsense already.

What if you're bisexual?

then you love everybody yet are hated by everybody at the same time.


I had a (what I assumed was) fairly progressive friend say he wouldn't date a bi girl because she hasn't figured out what she wants yet.

I was stunned to silence.
 
2017-07-17 12:33:50 PM  

durbnpoisn: The long standing problem with the religious right in this country has been that since "homosexuality is a choice", those that engage in such behavior must be deviants.  Because they already consider these people deviants, they must be deviant in other ways.  This has been the long standing opinion, and the source of the bias for decades.

It's taken a long, long time, for people to finally come to grips with the absolute, scientific fact, that homosexuality is NOT a choice at all.  It is biologically wired into a person's brain the same as sexuality is wired into the heterosexual brain.  And at the risk of stating the obvious, homosexuals are no better or worse than any one else.  Yet - there are plenty of examples of repressed ultra conservatives turning out to be the worst examples of deviants the world has ever produced.  Farking hypocrite assholes.

This sort of thing should not be in the Supreme Court any longer.  The fight is over.  No more cases should be entertained.  No more opinions need to be written.  Common sense and science have proved the conservative right to be incorrect, and told to STFU.  So enough of this nonsense already.


Just putting this out there... But if homosexuality IS a choice, does it change things? For instance, bisexuals who choose someone of the same sex? Lots of people are attracted to people of both sexes.

I hate the "I'm compelled by biology" thing, it reeks of guilt. How about "my body, my freedom"? Rights and freedoms shouldn't depend on the idea that some people can't help but trample the sensitive norms of idiots, and should be forgiven. fark em, it's called freedom and liberty and they just have to farking deal.

Same thing with transexuality. If I want to change my sex I shouldn't need someone's approval.
 
2017-07-17 12:35:17 PM  

durbnpoisn: The long standing problem with the religious right in this country has been that since "homosexuality is a choice", those that engage in such behavior must be deviants.  Because they already consider these people deviants, they must be deviant in other ways.  This has been the long standing opinion, and the source of the bias for decades.


I realized I was straight in second grade.  Science doesn't fully understand sexual orientation, but it's pretty clearly something that occurs in the womb.  It's not a choice.  For me, it was a matter of realizing as a seven-year-old that I really liked Princess Leia but wasn't interested in Han Solo.

LGBT people are at the very bottom of the list in terms of individuals people who might have a detrimental effect on my life.  I wish people would just leave them alone.
 
2017-07-17 12:40:27 PM  

aterry33: Science doesn't fully understand sexual orientation, but it's pretty clearly something that occurs in the womb.


Identical twins arent concordant enough for that to be very likely.

/which isn't to say that it is a choice, mind.
 
2017-07-17 12:42:41 PM  
It shouldn't be the governments business who you marry, and they shouldn't treat you any different if you are married or not. If you want to share property and responsibilities, make a contract.
 
2017-07-17 12:44:26 PM  

moothemagiccow: does anyone still care? gay marriage is legal and society hasn't collapsed.


Won't somebody think of the turtles?

img.fark.net
 
2017-07-17 12:46:35 PM  

mcsiegs: moothemagiccow: does anyone still care?

Yes...many care a whole lot what people do against their own jesus values.


"Saying "God hates (something)" is like saying "the Sun cools and darkens (something.)" William of Salbath 1651

God is love, look it up, it's in your book.
 
2017-07-17 12:48:33 PM  

NIXON YOU DOLT!!!!!: I had a (what I assumed was) fairly progressive friend say he wouldn't date a bi girl because she hasn't figured out what she wants yet.

I was stunned to silence.


that is fairly common and what I was poking at with my comment.  Straight folks and gay folks just think bi folks are confused people who just haven't converted completely to the gay end of the spectrum.   What is also odd, is they always think the bi person is a closet gay and not a closet heterosexual.  you can apparently only move in one direction once you sampled from the other side of the table.

I can somewhat understand people avoiding bi men due to risk factors;  The DL thing does have a negative stimga that is somewhat earned.
 
2017-07-17 12:51:17 PM  
Skimmed the article, did not read word-for-word.  My take is that the article is snark, not news.  Final paragraph:
"But it doesn't dictate what a judge might do in the next case, he said, if circumstances - for instance, the court's membership - change."
After all, TFA is a blog post, With no pretense of being a news article.

My read on John Roberts at this point in time is that he is a clear example of "The Supreme Court reads the election returns" [Finley Peter Dunne (1867-1936) in Mr. Dooley, 1901].

The "issue" of gay marriage seems contrived to me.  Articles that oppose gay marriage seem to come from homophobia and somehow see a threat to traditional marriage, which to me is like seeing a hot-rod with a bow-tie 502 dropped in a 1957 Ford hard-top convertible as a challenge to Audi dealerships.  And, IANAL but marriage doesn't seem to be within the powers of the Federal government but instead is a State matter.  Legal implications are relevant to matters such as intestate inheritance, hospital visitation, and common-law partner job benefits; the reality of a problem is there only with intestate inheritance.  Let people do what they want and a lot of "issues" go away.

So, I'm not sure what a given Supreme Court justice thinks about gay marriage is relevant. An activist Justice is likely to favor it, and a constructionist Justice is likely to see it as a State matter and not subject to Constitutional law.
 
2017-07-17 12:52:43 PM  

OldJames: It shouldn't be the governments business who you marry, and they shouldn't treat you any different if you are married or not. If you want to share property and responsibilities, make a contract.


I am more on this slant.  why don't we remove marriage from gov't?  why do we need the option to file taxes jointly?  Do SS benefits and benefactors need to be a spouse instead of a designated party?  why should single/married be any concern with anything dealing with the gov't?

I get there are social engineering angles, but for purely political reasons, would our gov't cease to function if it didn't care if its citizens are married or living in sin?
 
2017-07-17 12:55:56 PM  

Billy Bathsalt: mcsiegs: moothemagiccow: does anyone still care?

Yes...many care a whole lot what people do against their own jesus values.

"Saying "God hates (something)" is like saying "the Sun cools and darkens (something.)" William of Salbath 1651

God is love, look it up, it's in your book.


...not my book...my comment was speaking against religious hypocrites...I am agnostic on a good day
 
2017-07-17 01:01:09 PM  
That sure as fark was a long article about speculation in hopes to get people to think Roberts voted in favor.

Its nothing more than an opinion piece and I can get opinions about happenings from the 90 year old senile woman on my street along with the homeless guy that talks to empty cans behind the grocery store.

This entire damn thing should have ended a decade ago when people were saying that the government should have nothing to do with this topic. Stop regulating marriage and stop thinking A religion controls it. If some dipshiat wants to marry another dipshiat, let them find a third dipshiat willing to marry them.

No one should be forced to marry a couple just like no couple should be forced to get married.
 
2017-07-17 01:02:29 PM  
Wow.  A gay-bashing headline from an obvious liberal victim.

You forgot the NTTAWWT, subby.
 
2017-07-17 01:12:28 PM  

Hyjamon: OldJames: It shouldn't be the governments business who you marry, and they shouldn't treat you any different if you are married or not. If you want to share property and responsibilities, make a contract.

I am more on this slant.  why don't we remove marriage from gov't?  why do we need the option to file taxes jointly?  Do SS benefits and benefactors need to be a spouse instead of a designated party?  why should single/married be any concern with anything dealing with the gov't?

I get there are social engineering angles, but for purely political reasons, would our gov't cease to function if it didn't care if its citizens are married or living in sin?


Agreed, marriage is an archaic social institution that we've moved beyond and needs to be readdressed soon. Not just in the "straight vs gay" aspect, but in terms of linking legal rights of contract between people to romantic love. This disregards people who don't want to marry, don't want to cohabitate, want to cohabitate with someone they don't wish to marry, aromantics, and the like. If we could get over this idea of (heterosexual) romance > marriage > joint property ownership > cohabitation > nuclear family as the ideal, we'll be on our way to a society that's more inclusive, equitable, and fair.

It deeply irks me that the ideal social contract is one with a romantic partner and any other form of relationship isn't legally protected or socially codified. The age of the nuclear family is waning, and social structures in future generations are going to look quite different.
 
2017-07-17 01:12:58 PM  
He's a Republican. Easy way to find out of he changed his mind on it.

Ask him if anyone close to him has come out as gay recently. Republicans only care when something affects them personally. Otherwise, they'll vote against it.
 
2017-07-17 01:14:03 PM  

durbnpoisn: The long standing problem with the religious right in this country has been that since "homosexuality is a choice", those that engage in such behavior must be deviants... It's taken a long, long time, for people to finally come to grips with the absolute, scientific fact, that homosexuality is NOT a choice at all.  It is biologically wired into a person's brain the same as sexuality is wired into the heterosexual brain.


CSB time:
I grew up in a very cultish, fanatical foster family. I try to avoid all contact at any cost.
They had this odd twist of Free Will, the philosophy that "You CHOOSE everything that 'Happens To' you."
As in, please stop hurting me... "But you CHOSE this to 'Happen To' you, and I'm not responsible for your decisions!"
But you're being so mean... "Well, you CHOOSE to feel that way, and I'm not responsible for your feelings!"

At my brother's funeral, several of them were talking about how bad Gay Marriage is.
And how they can tell people are Gay, by their "Look." Because they are totally, way not-gay.
 I asked, "Well, if some people are born 'Looking Gay,' doesn't that mean God made them that way?"

They angrily screamed, "But those people CHOOSE that lifestyle! They could CHOOSE to obey God!"
Oohhhhh... the same way that you are choosing to live the "Straight Lifestyle"...

One of those foster cousins killed herself about a year after coming out of the closet.
She was the only one of them who was nice to me.

So, I always assume that people you get their knickers in a twist over Gay Marriage are just jealous that they can't get one. Or be in the middle.
 
2017-07-17 01:19:06 PM  

OldJames: It shouldn't be the governments business who you marry, and they shouldn't treat you any different if you are married or not. If you want to share property and responsibilities, make a contract.


But, it's so much more fun to smear shiat upon conservatives, religions, and millennia-old customs.
 
2017-07-17 01:19:31 PM  

moothemagiccow: does anyone still care? gay marriage is legal and society hasn't collapsed.


That depends on who you ask.
Abortion has been legal for decades and most people will admit society still functions.  But pick the right person, like, say ... just under half the Supreme Court justices, and they'll tell you this country is an apocalypse of abortionplexes from sea to shining sea.
 
2017-07-17 01:21:05 PM  
adamatari:

I hate the "I'm compelled by biology" thing, it reeks of guilt. How about "my body, my freedom"? Rights and freedoms shouldn't depend on the idea that some people can't help but trample the sensitive norms of idiots, and should be forgiven. fark em, it's called freedom and liberty and they just have to farking deal.

It is biology.  A person's sexual orientation is pretty much fixed at the beginning. You basically said "someone who is [insert sexual orientation or gender here] isn't that way because of biology, and that acknowledging their [insert sexual orientation or gender here]  is some kind of guilt about being [insert sexual orientation or gender here]."

I'm gay and trans.  I understand that I am because of biology, and I certainly don't feel any shame or guilt about it, as I understand that this was just how I was born.  While yes, some people do feel shame/guilt about their sexuality, that has nothing to do with biology, but rather society and the environment in which they were raised, IMHO.

Other than that, you made some good points,
 
2017-07-17 01:22:46 PM  
Yes-the debate should be over. Ideally, politicians should have enough integrity not to pander to ignorant and bigoted constituents for the easy-least votes they provide.
Unfortunately, the calibre of those who aspire to be leaders has been getting lower and lower and it makes it extremely hard to rid society of narrow-minded thinking.

I mean just look at those senile old coots  in the house and Senate.  They all know that his ignorant policies are poison to what the country stands for, but these TRAITORS refuse to do what's best for the country and vote to get rid of 45 because they are just plain chicken to go against their precious party or are profiting from having him in power.

They all should be rotting in jail.
 
Displayed 50 of 123 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report