Finally: Supreme Court agrees to settle gay marriage dispute

[NACBA]

Setting the stage for its most significant ruling ever on gay rights, the U.S. Supreme Court said Friday it would resolve the state-by-state battle over same-sex marriage.

The justices said they will decide cases from Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee, where state officials are defending laws that limit marriage to a man and a woman.

The high court is expected to hear arguments in late April and will probably issue a decision by the end of June.

The case could lead to a landmark ruling on whether gay and lesbian couples have a right to marry nationwide under constitutional protections for individual rights and equal treatment.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-supreme-court-gay-marriage-20150116-story.html

 

[Ronin Truth]

Any predictions or bets?

 

[NACBA]

Any predictions or bets?

The Supreme Court will say but a 5-4 vote that the 14th amendment forces states to let gay people marry.

 

[Tywysog Cymru]

Any predictions or bets?

The Supreme Court is going to force the states to recognize gay marriages.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Any predictions or bets?

I predict that this will temporarily distract everyone and further deepen the ruse of "individual rights" while individuality is slowly eroded and also adding to the delusion that the gay "rights" movement has anything to do with rights at all.

 

[Southron]

The Supreme Court is going to force the states to recognize gay marriages.

The Federal Courts have been pretty much doing that for some time.

 

[willwash]

Could a state abolish marriage as a legal institution altogether rather than recognize gay marriage?

 

[Southron]

Could a state abolish marriage as a legal institution altogether rather than recognize gay marriage?

Probably, but I suspect many in power in the states actually want legal recognition of homosexual marriage, but they are just too afraid to vote for it themselves. It is the people of the states themselves who don't want it.

 

[Tywysog Cymru]

The Federal Courts have been pretty much doing that for some time.

Yeah, ever since the Windsor decision I knew it was a matter of time.

 

[Keith and stuff]

Could a state abolish marriage as a legal institution altogether rather than recognize gay marriage?

Maybe. Legislators looked at doing that in NH. Then some legislators in OK also looked at the idea. The main problem other than the idea being fringe and is that it would cause massive problems as the federal government wouldn't recognize any marriages performed or registered in that state. There is no chance legislators would support the idea, even it became a popular idea, unless a solution the federal conflict was worked out.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Could a state abolish marriage as a legal institution altogether rather than recognize gay marriage?

Yes. However if they wait until after the SCOTUS decision to do so it may get challenged in court.

 

[Anti Federalist]

I predict that this will temporarily distract everyone and further deepen the ruse of "individual rights" while individuality is slowly eroded and also adding to the delusion that the gay "rights" movement has anything to do with rights at all.

I'll bet that too.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Yes. However if they wait until after the SCOTUS decision to do so it may get challenged in court.

Just kicking the can down the road anyways, the next legal hurdle is forcing churches to perform same sex marriages.

You'll see the first arrests for non compliance in the next couple of years.

 

[johnwk]

Will the Court uphold the documented legislative intent of the 14th Amendment in marriage case

.

The only important question I have is, will the members of the Court decide the question based upon the legislative intent of the 14th Amendment as expressed by its framers [the 39th Congress] and those who ratified the amendment? Or, will a majority of the Court engage in judicial tyranny and render an opinion based upon their personal sense of justice and fairness?

JWK



"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges' views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice." -- Justice Hugo L. Black ( U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1886 - 1971) Source: Lecture, Columbia University, 1968

 

[DFF]

Although I don't personally care what someone does in the privacy of his or her home, the notion that gay "marriage" is somehow a healthy thing is laughable.
Men engaging in gay sex is the number way HIV is transmitted. For all intents and purposes, AIDS is a gay (and intravenous drug) disease.
Additionally, gays produce no offspring, so the whole "lifestyle" either through disease or lack of copulation eventually leads to one thing: death.
This isn't the sort of thing the state should be encouraging. If anything there should be laws against it like in Russia.

 

[69360]

Although I don't personally care what someone does in the privacy of his or her home, the notion that gay "marriage" is somehow a healthy thing is laughable.
Men engaging in gay sex is the number way HIV is transmitted. For all intents and purposes, AIDS is a gay (and intravenous drug) disease.
Additionally, gays produce no offspring, so the whole "lifestyle" either through disease or lack of copulation eventually leads to one thing: death.
This isn't the sort of thing the state should be encouraging. If anything there should be laws against it like in Russia.

They do have offspring, surrogates and donors are used.

I predict the supremes will get fabulous. I guess I'm ok with that for now. Government out of marriage all together would be best.

 

[DFF]

They do have offspring, surrogates and donors are used.

How "natural" for a child to grow up around two gay men...this explains why children raised in "gay" families have higher instances of suicide, drug abuse, and mental problems.

I do agree though the state should keep it's nose out of things.

 

[parocks]

Although I don't personally care what someone does in the privacy of his or her home, the notion that gay "marriage" is somehow a healthy thing is laughable.
Men engaging in gay sex is the number way HIV is transmitted. For all intents and purposes, AIDS is a gay (and intravenous drug) disease.
Additionally, gays produce no offspring, so the whole "lifestyle" either through disease or lack of copulation eventually leads to one thing: death.
This isn't the sort of thing the state should be encouraging. If anything there should be laws against it like in Russia.

Extinctionary. Bad public policy.

 

[jonhowe]

Just kicking the can down the road anyways, the next legal hurdle is forcing churches to perform same sex marriages.

You'll see the first arrests for non compliance in the next couple of years.

I live in NYC and work with the most liberal of the liberal. I don't know anyone who would be ok with that scenario. I think people are reading too deep into this gay marriage issue.

 

[William Tell]

Any predictions or bets?

We all know how it will end. Especially since they have lesbian on there.