TOTALLY GEEKED!

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Law of the Land has changed.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

The majority of that court has forgotten their place - it is not to make laws.

Ohfour · Hooker

Lawyerlady wrote:
The majority of that court has forgotten their place - it is not to make laws.

I've actually gone back and forth on this, and I think that as long as the tax codes and government benefits are based on legal marriage, this HAD to be done. I wish the government would get out of the marriage business all together, but since that's not going to happen, this needed to...

msrock · Guru

I'm ok with it.

FNW · Guru

<sigh> This is what I tell my boys...Just because something is legal, doesn't make it right.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

I admit I am confused.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Ohfour wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
The majority of that court has forgotten their place - it is not to make laws.
I've actually gone back and forth on this, and I think that as long as the tax codes and government benefits are based on legal marriage, this HAD to be done. I wish the government would get out of the marriage business all together, but since that's not going to happen, this needed to...

I agree it had to be either one way or the other. I'm just very concerned over the power grab of these recent decisions by the SCOTUS.

Vette · Owl drink to that!

I was wondering when this was going to get brought up, it's been all over Facebook

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

I don't think this is the end of it.

FNW · Guru

VetteGirl wrote:
I was wondering when this was going to get brought up, it's been all over Facebook

Yes, it has. And I block those posts. Here's the one that I posted:

http://jimdaly.focusonthefamily.com/no-court-can-change-what-marriage-is/?utm_source=fb_focus&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=usscmd

And that's all I have to say about that.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Now I wonder how long till churches are forced to preform these abominations.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

HALLELUJAH!!!!!

flan

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

About time!!!
Happy day for many.

Ohfour · Hooker

You know, there IS a silver lining to this...:)

The court ruled, that based on the 14th Amendment, all states have to honor the outcome of laws the other states, right? That was written in the ruling.

Well, my Tennessee carry permit has to be legal in all states too!

So, not such a bad day. The motions are already being filed...:)

Lindley · Guru

lilyofcourse wrote:
Now I wonder how long till churches are forced to preform these abominations.

I worry about that too.

FNW · Guru

And think of all the income attorneys will get now with all the gay divorces! More marriages, more divorces! Heck, maybe I should practice Family Law...

chillepeppa · Regular

Some good news. I'm very glad for those this will positively impact.

-- Edited by chillepeppa on Saturday 27th of June 2015 04:14:58 AM

Ohfour · Hooker

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.

Gun control nuts are going to FREAK!

burns07 · Guru

judicial activism at its worst--makes one wonder how it's possible to intimidate judges--easy with the local ones who are elected--you either buy them or threaten them--with SCOTUS, they're tenured for life and doubt they could be bought ( at least not cheaply )--makes me wonder if they've been personally threatened

as with the 26 states where homosexual unions were already legal, only 11 of those states ( barely 20% of the 50 states ) actually had the issue on the ballot--the rest, had the overwhelming consensus of the respective populations overruled by the judiciary via lawsuits, not elections / popular votes

FNW · Guru

Article IV already does this...full faith & credit clause. Including this in the decision was overkill, and merely grandstanding, IMO.

Ohfour · Hooker

FNW wrote:
Article IV already does this...full faith & credit clause. Including this in the decision was overkill, and merely grandstanding, IMO.

But the states were refusing that Article. That's why this had to be done...I agree with the Constitutionality of that part of the ruling.

Ohfour · Hooker

burns07 wrote:

judicial activism at its worst--makes one wonder how it's possible to intimidate judges--easy with the local ones who are elected--you either buy them or threaten them--with SCOTUS, they're tenured for life and doubt they could be bought ( at least not cheaply )--makes me wonder if they've been personally threatened

as with the 26 states where homosexual unions were already legal, only 11 of those states ( barely 20% of the 50 states ) actually had the issue on the ballot--the rest, had the overwhelming consensus of the respective populations overruled by the judiciary via lawsuits, not elections / popular votes

I don't care. The constitution says this:

Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.

Once one state made it legal, the other had to honor those judicial proceedings...

just Czech · Give Me Grand's!

Ohfour wrote:
You know, there IS a silver lining to this...:)

The court ruled, that based on the 14th Amendment, all states have to honor the outcome of laws the other states, right? That was written in the ruling.

Well, my Tennessee carry permit has to be legal in all states too!

So, not such a bad day. The motions are already being filed...:)

I am definitely for the conceal to carry gun laws. I think I may go get one. With this ruling, no state can stop me from carrying a gun now. I like it!!!

FNW · Guru

I'm not sure forcing all states to recognize same sex marriage can be applied to gun permits. And aren't permits issued by states? And isn't the permit only valid in the state of issue? Arguably, driver's licenses are issued by states and recognized when traveling, but if you move, you are required to have a new license issued, and pass any state-required tests first.

I'm not opposed to gun permits at all....I'm just not certain this new ruling as any affect on gun permits.

just Czech · Give Me Grand's!

FNW wrote:
I'm not sure forcing all states to recognize same sex marriage can be applied to gun permits. And aren't permits issued by states? And isn't the permit only valid in the state of issue? Arguably, driver's licenses are issued by states and recognized when traveling, but if you move, you are required to have a new license issued, and pass any state-required tests first.

I'm not opposed to gun permits at all....I'm just not certain this new ruling as any affect on gun permits.

Oh, my dear, the door is wide open now. Just watch all the law suits for rights start piling in to the states that bar whatever. This is going to be a bona fide free for all.

Ohfour · Hooker

FNW wrote:
I'm not sure forcing all states to recognize same sex marriage can be applied to gun permits. And aren't permits issued by states? And isn't the permit only valid in the state of issue? Arguably, driver's licenses are issued by states and recognized when traveling, but if you move, you are required to have a new license issued, and pass any state-required tests first.

I'm not opposed to gun permits at all....I'm just not certain this new ruling as any affect on gun permits.

Marriage licenses are issued by the state too. And your marriage carries from state to state. My husband has live in many states. He has never had to take the test over. He took it one time. 50 years ago. They don't make you re-rest.

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

So when all the gay people get divorced and start bitching about alimony I'm going to laugh my azz off.

FNW · Guru

I had to re-take my written test in WV when I first moved there. A friend had to re-take the driving part, too, because her license had expired one day.

just Czech · Give Me Grand's!

FNW wrote:
I had to re-take my written test in WV when I first moved there. A friend had to re-take the driving part, too, because her license had expired one day.

Fine, then retake the test state to state, but the states can no longer make it impossible for you to carry a concealed weapon or bar concealed weapons if it is legal in so much as one state.

All state driving tests are similar. I've taken the test in three states and they all looked alike.

I see the same coming for carrying concealed weapons now.

burns07 · Guru

a rather more ominous repercussion of this decision would seem to be the de facto removal of ANYONE'S religious freedom to object on moral grounds

more troubling to me than driver's license / CHL license reciprocity

FNW · Guru

I don't disagree with the logic, I just don't see how today's ruling applies.

ed11563 · Guru

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
So when all the gay people get divorced and start bitching about alimony I'm going to laugh my azz off.

I don't see you laughing about people getting divorced and bitching about alimony now, I don't think you will laugh at other people's misery later. That's not you.

FNW · Guru

I see her laughing in more of a "be careful what you wish for" kind of way....

Pikachu · Newbie

lilyofcourse wrote:
Now I wonder how long till churches are forced to preform these abominations.

I don't think that will happen. When my state legalized same-sex marriage, it was very clearly laid out that religious institutions would not be forced to perform such marriages if it went against their tenets and so far, that is exactly how it's been. In fact, I can't think of any cases so far where a Church or Mosque or Synagogue was forced to perform a same-sex ceremony in those states where it has been legal for some time. To do so would be a clear violation of established First Amendment rights.

A Priest or Rabbi or Imam or whatever is not required for a marriage to be considered valid by a state. A JoP or other authorized person can perform the legally binding civil ceremony. A religious ceremony is not required if one is not desired. For those that do want one, it's pretty easy to find a minister or other religious person to oversee the proceedings and sign the license. The fact that a Catholic priest can sign a marriage license and perform both the function of the state (the civil/legal part) and of the religion (religious marriage ceremony) is a convenience only. In many other nations, the civil aspect and the religious aspect are separate and it's the civil part that makes the marriage legally binding.

So, to whit, I don't think you'll have to worry about seeing any "abominations" at your church, only the one in your mirror. And as long as you're not planning on marrying someone of the same gender, this ruling has no bearing on you or your marriage, if you are married.

Feel free to continue to hate away, but I think Jesus would be ashamed of you.

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

FNW wrote:
I see her laughing in more of a "be careful what you wish for" kind of way....

EXACTLY!! Everyone thinks marriage is the greatest thing. Until you're in it.

See, this is what kills me. I know a gay couple. They got legally married. Then he got laid off and he applied for welfare benefits. He was turned down because his husband made too much money. He got all pissed off saying they shouldn't consider his husbands income since the US didn't recognize gay marriage. Only his state did. He went on a long diatribe on FB saying he should get all the benefits of being single while technically being married. Oy vey.

burns07 · Guru

And as long as you're not planning on marrying someone of the same gender, this ruling has no bearing on you or your marriage, if you are married.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

au contraire--it has a great deal to do with " marriage " indeed--and this is not the end by a very long way

Pikachu · Newbie

burns07 wrote:

And as long as you're not planning on marrying someone of the same gender, this ruling has no bearing on you or your marriage, if you are married.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

au contraire--it has a great deal to do with " marriage " indeed--and this is not the end by a very long way

So you have no argument? Just vague fear mongering?

I mean really. I've been married for 15 years. Nobody else's marriages have had anything to with mine. I live in a state where same sex marriage was already legal. When it was approved, it had no impact on my marriage then and doesn't now. How does two people of the same gender being allowed to marry interfere in your wedded union any more than to different gendered people getting married? It doesn't.

msrock · Guru

Pikachu wrote:
burns07 wrote:

And as long as you're not planning on marrying someone of the same gender, this ruling has no bearing on you or your marriage, if you are married.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

au contraire--it has a great deal to do with " marriage " indeed--and this is not the end by a very long way

So you have no argument? Just vague fear mongering?
I mean really. I've been married for 15 years. Nobody else's marriages have had anything to with mine. I live in a state where same sex marriage was already legal. When it was approved, it had no impact on my marriage then and doesn't now. How does two people of the same gender being allowed to marry interfere in your wedded union any more than to different gendered people getting married? It doesn't.

I agree.

burns07 · Guru

So you have no argument? Just vague fear mongering?
____________________________________________

LOL--you're the one coming on here talking about " hate " and " looking in the mirror " and Jesus--you could at least make an effort to not be so hypocritical

Pikachu · Newbie

burns07 wrote:

So you have no argument? Just vague fear mongering?
____________________________________________

LOL--you're the one coming on here talking about " hate " and " looking in the mirror " and Jesus--you could at least make an effort to not be so hypocritical

I haven't said anything hypocritical.

I merely pointed out that the hatred so many Christians spew is in direct opposition to the actions and words of Jesus. Perhaps YOU should take a look at Matthew 22: 34-40.

You are the one that claims same-sex marriage will somehow interfere in your marriage. I'd like to know how because I don't see how this ruling impacts anyone other than those that are of the same sex and wanting to get married.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

I'd say this is pretty clear on the subject.

Leviticus 20:13If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Yes. GOD loves everyone. But He never tolerates sin.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

This will lead to the churches being forced to comply.

It will happen.

msrock · Guru

lilyofcourse wrote:
This will lead to the churches being forced to comply.

It will happen.

You really need to get out more. aww

burns07 · Guru

You are the one that claims same-sex marriage will somehow interfere in your marriage.
_______________________________________________________________________

um, no--didn't make that claim--homosexuality is offensive / repugnant to me physically, personally and morally--and the idea that ANYONE should be FORCED to accept something like homosexuality is anathema to personal freedom ( religious or otherwise ) and the liberties and principles this country was founded upon

Mellow Momma · Sniff...sniff, sniff. Yay! A Bum!

Churches already refuse to marry plenty of people. Lots of man/woman couples are refused a church marriage every day. The Catholic Church won't marry a couple unless both are Catholic. Shoot, they won't marry a Catholic couple unless they pay for marriage classes and do premarital counseling. Churches won't marry people who are not members of their denomination, who aren't members of that particular church location even. Churches refuse to marry people every day on all sorts of grounds so I would not worry about your (general you) church being "forced" to marry anyone.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

msrock wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
This will lead to the churches being forced to comply.

It will happen.
You really need to get out more.

I'm seeing the big picture.

The ripple effects of this is going to immense.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Remember when desegregation happened?

Every private business, every church, everything was made to follow the new law. Now let me say I completely agree with that.

But the same thing is going to happen now. Only this is a deeply rooted religious issue. And now any refusal will become illegal.

Mellow Momma · Sniff...sniff, sniff. Yay! A Bum!

lilyofcourse wrote:
Remember when desegregation happened?

Every private business, every church, everything was made to follow the new law. Now let me say I completely agree with that.

But the same thing is going to happen now. Only this is a deeply rooted religious issue. And now any refusal will become illegal.

No it won't. I am not Catholic. I cannot go to a Catholic church and demand that they marry me and a man. (Assuming we are both single). They won't because it's against their religion to marry anyone who is not Catholic. This will be the same.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

No. Because it isn't illegal to refuse because you are not catholic.

See the difference?

Southern_Belle · Nothing's Impossible

lilyofcourse wrote:
Remember when desegregation happened?

Every private business, every church, everything was made to follow the new law. Now let me say I completely agree with that.

But the same thing is going to happen now. Only this is a deeply rooted religious issue. And now any refusal will become illegal.

Totally different.