DOMA Ruled Unconstitutional by Supreme Court

page: 3
33
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 11:19 AM
link   
about time! EQUALITY for all! ditto what everyone else already said!




posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Now that this has passed, the rest is academic.

Article IV of the US Constitution.


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.


This section of the constitution is what makes your marriage in one state legal in another, even if you do not qualify for marriage in that state.

Same Sex Marriage is now legal in the United States.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by BubbaJoe
 


I was attracted to big guns from an early age, don't know why, just felt compelled involuntarily.




Its not about "choice" it is all about what is constitutional. The constitution is a limit on government interfering with your endowed rights. Just as it should not dictate marriage it also shall not dictate other rights enumerated, the second being doubly strict with its "shall not be infringed" not found in other clauses.

The DOMA issue sets good precedent for others whose rights have been trampled even if you yourself don't exercise those rights - remember constitution limits government, not you! or others for that matter.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee
 



Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee
Same Sex Marriage is now legal in the United States.


As a country, yes. But each state can still decide for itself whether to permit same-sex marriage.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 11:34 AM
link   
Having read the opinion and dissenting opinion of the ruling the following can be stated:

Both were interesting reads, and I hope that every one reads it well. The case on DOMA was one where the Justices pointed out in the opinon that the law was badly written, in that it tries to enforce a morality on the people by seperating an undesirable portion of the population. They denial prevented a group from having the very rights that others would have and ultimately end up allowing one group to have a better means of persuing happiness and liberty. Thus the Justices found that DOMA did not stand up against constitutional challenge and was struck down by majority vote.

But in the Discenting opinion the justices did make several valid points. The first is that the Judicial branch of the government is not there to make laws or policies. It can not be both prosecuter or defender of laws, that is not its purpose, nor can it be asked to put weight on which state would have a precidence to that aspect.

And the question to that end, who has more weight when it comes to the law, for example, take North Carolina and Massachusets. In North Carolina, by overwhelming majority vote, determined that Gay marriage was not ok, and would not be recognized. But in Massachusets, it was determined by majority vote that gay marriage is legal. Which state has presidence?

If anything, this is going to make more legal questions that will have to go through the courts. One being, if 2 men got married in say Washington, where gay marriage is recognized, and then move to Texas where it is not recognized, how would it affect the married couple?



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 11:34 AM
link   
I think it's time to start calling the states that insist on making gay marriage illegal "The Discrimination States of America." They have every right to decide who can and cannot marry of course, but let's call it what it is and stop letting them use ridiculous terminology like "Defense of Marriage." It's discrimination plan and simple - use the right words and be honest about what you're really doing.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee
 



Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee
Same Sex Marriage is now legal in the United States.


As a country, yes. But each state can still decide for itself whether to permit same-sex marriage.


Whether or not to issue licenses for marriage. They no longer have the legal grounds to deny the benefits of a legally obtained license from another state now that DOMA has been declared unconstitutional.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by sdcigarpig
 

Nice post!



Originally posted by sdcigarpig
And the question to that end, who has more weight when it comes to the law, for example, take North Carolina and Massachusets. In North Carolina, by overwhelming majority vote, determined that Gay marriage was not ok, and would not be recognized. But in Massachusets, it was determined by majority vote that gay marriage is legal. Which state has presidence?


Neither state. Each state's laws will be valid in that state.

But I agree that there will be more legal questions and legal cases when a gay married couple moves to another state.



If anything, this is going to make more legal questions that will have to go through the courts. One being, if 2 men got married in say Washington, where gay marriage is recognized, and then move to Texas where it is not recognized, how would it affect the married couple?


I would think the married couple would still get federal benefits, but the state and federal rules depend on each other and someone is going to have to sort all that our. I suggest for now, if a gay couple marries, they should live in a state where it's legal to be assured to receive the benefits.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Ironic, gays want to marry, straights don't, didn't the gays get the memo?

OH well, just sayin



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee
 



Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee
They no longer have the legal grounds to deny the benefits of a legally obtained license from another state now that DOMA has been declared unconstitutional.


If that's true, I am unaware of it. (Only a portion of DOMA was ruled unconstitutional - the part that denies federal benefits to same-sex couples.)



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by cconn487
The world didn't end did it?

Did everyone spontaneously stop pursuing heterosexual relations and now we face the decline and eventual extinction of the human race?

Yep, didn't think so


This decision contributes to the demographic winter we're in, contraception is against God too. Laugh all you want, only for a time. God's just judgment for our nation is coming.

Marriage is between a man and woman, not a woman and woman or a man and a man.

Marriage is a Sacrament, it is holy.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 11:45 AM
link   
republican.......heads..........exploding



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by colbe
 



Originally posted by colbe
Marriage is a Sacrament, it is holy.


My husband and I, both atheists, disagree. Marriage CAN be a religious union, but secular marriage is a state contract between two consenting adults.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee
 



Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee
They no longer have the legal grounds to deny the benefits of a legally obtained license from another state now that DOMA has been declared unconstitutional.


If that's true, I am unaware of it. (Only a portion of DOMA was ruled unconstitutional - the part that denies federal benefits to same-sex couples.)


Section 3 was included to protect Section 2 from Article IV section 1 of the US Constitution. The Justices ruled that the protection was unconstitutional, which is a very narrow sliver and probably the only ruling that could have been passed today. The next challenge to DOMA will be whether or not Section 2 violates Article VI on it's own, now that Section 3 no longer federally defines marriage as one man, one woman. I don't expect a challenge within the next 4 years, but it is merely academic at this point.
edit on 26-6-2013 by MichaelPMaccabee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee
 


Thanks for the clarification. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the courts in the coming years.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by colbe
 



Originally posted by colbe
Marriage is a Sacrament, it is holy.


My husband and I, both atheists, disagree. Marriage CAN be a religious union, but secular marriage is a state contract between two consenting adults.


What do you mean "CAN be?" The basis for the family is Sacramental marriage, a historical fact. This is God's plan. You recognize the "state" but not God, don't do that BH. The "state" does not have and so obvious today, a perfect history of protecting and lifting up humanity.

In your heart, you must realize, God loved you first, He created you.


may the Two Hearts J+M keep you safe,



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   
Times are changing and Boehner and company are about to miss the train.



“While I am obviously disappointed in the ruling, it is always critical that we protect our system of checks and balances,” Boehner said in a statement. “A robust national debate over marriage will continue in the public square, and it is my hope that states will define marriage as the union between one man and one woman.” Read more: www.politico.com...


www.politico.com...



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by colbe
 


You are entitled to your opinion. I won't argue about religion in this thread, because it has nothing to do with religion. It's a legal ruling about equal treatment of citizens.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by colbe

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by colbe
 



Originally posted by colbe
Marriage is a Sacrament, it is holy.


My husband and I, both atheists, disagree. Marriage CAN be a religious union, but secular marriage is a state contract between two consenting adults.


What do you mean "CAN be?" The basis for the family is Sacramental marriage, a historical fact. This is God's plan. You recognize the "state" but not God, don't do that BH. The "state" does not have and so obvious today, a perfect history of protecting and lifting up humanity.

In your heart, you must realize, God loved you first, He created you.


may the Two Hearts J+M keep you safe,


Are you married? If marriage is merely a scarament, did you get a legal license to wed? Why? Oh, because it is also a civil contract? But wait.. can I get married without any religious affiliation? Yup. Can I get married in a church without a legal license? Yup.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Simply FABULOUS!





new topics
top topics
 
33
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join