Doma ruled unconstitutional

[Jmpty]

And Prop 8 case dismissed. Almost makes up for the voting rights decision. Well done, SCOTUS. :)

[SGOS]

Just read that on my home page, and it's turned out much as I expected, although I was braced for a surprise.  I found it ironic that the issue was settled on the basis of states rights, which has always been a cornerstone of right wing talking points against the Federal government.  Well, there you have it: states rights.  Go suck on that for awhile. :-D

[_Xenu_]

This is definitely going to be a big deal in states that recognize gay marriage/civil unions.

[StupidWiz]

Glad to hear this.  :)

[AllPurposeAtheist]

There was no defense of it and the courts finally saw the writing on the wall, but bet your bottom dollar states will continue to push as.many barriers in place as they can including, but not limited to the same bullshit they pull with voting rights.

[Elohim]

Glad to see this.

[Smartmarzipan]

Here is the full text, if anyone wanted to read it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/2 ... 54858.html

Have I ever mentioned I hate Scalia? Well, I do. Just thought I'd put that out there.

[stromboli]

There was no defense of it and the courts finally saw the writing on the wall, but bet your bottom dollar states will continue to push as.many barriers in place as they can including, but not limited to the same bullshit they pull with voting rights.

Obama way back when vacated support of DOMA simply because he knew it was unconstitutional. There will certainly be barriers placed at the state level, but the constitutionality of it, the final stance or lack of it, is decided. Also, the Prop 8 decision made by US district Court's Vaughn Walker was so comprehensive that to overturn every aspect of it would be very difficult. So it is a huge win, in any sense that matters.

[Smartmarzipan]

From what I gathered, it is unconstitutional for the federal government to discriminate against same-sex married people, like with their taxes and benefits and stuff. As far as gay marriage goes, it's still a state thing. States can still vote on if they will allow gay marriage or not. The Prop 8 issue is a bit confusing to me, but I think that the Supreme Court didn't rule on it because a lower court already ruled on it. They just dismissed the appeal and let the original ruling in the lower court stand. And I believe the original ruling the lower court was against it? I was reading something about it, but I still got confused.

Either way, same-sex married people (where it's allowed) have just about an equal a marriage as a straight couple.

[Brian37]

And Prop 8 case dismissed. Almost makes up for the voting rights decision. Well done, SCOTUS. :)

"Dismissed" means tossed back to the lower courts, usually on a technicality. Was prop 8 overturned or simply tossed back to the lower courts?

[_Xenu_]

And Prop 8 case dismissed. Almost makes up for the voting rights decision. Well done, SCOTUS. :)

"Dismissed" means tossed back to the lower courts, usually on a technicality. Was prop 8 overturned or simply tossed back to the lower courts?

Prop 8 was overturned. The voting rights issue was returned to lower courts.

[Brian37]

From what I gathered, it is unconstitutional for the federal government to discriminate against same-sex married people, like with their taxes and benefits and stuff. As far as gay marriage goes, it's still a state thing. States can still vote on if they will allow gay marriage or not. The Prop 8 issue is a bit confusing to me, but I think that the Supreme Court didn't rule on it because a lower court already ruled on it. They just dismissed the appeal and let the original ruling in the lower court stand. And I believe the original ruling the lower court was against it? I was reading something about it, but I still got confused.

Either way, same-sex married people (where it's allowed) have just about an equal a marriage as a straight couple.

Still bullshit. Sorry, but there is no splitting the baby on this one. "Marriage" in the eyes of the government is merely a financial contract where you agree to care for the welfare of the person you marry, it is  not a religious document indorsed by the government, because government cannot play favorites to one religion over another and is supposed to stay out of the issue.

You cannot tell gays they cannot sign a marriage license anymore than you can tell a Muslim women she cant get a drivers license. The Supremacy clause in the Constitution should have taken care of this issue. States rights are the priority ONLY when they don't step on the rights of the individual, and our government is supposed to be a sanctuary government, not mob rule by popularity.

[Solitary]

Why is something that was obviously against "justice and liberty for all" ever against the law in the first place in a free secular society?  Only religion and politics can screw up common sense so well. Just think how wonderful it could be for all if our government was a theocracy. :shock:  :roll:   I hate the fact that Christianity has become political, and idiot politicians that are Christians like Scalia make our laws.  :P     Solitary

[Brian37]

There was no defense of it and the courts finally saw the writing on the wall, but bet your bottom dollar states will continue to push as.many barriers in place as they can including, but not limited to the same bullshit they pull with voting rights.

Obama way back when vacated support of DOMA simply because he knew it was unconstitutional. There will certainly be barriers placed at the state level, but the constitutionality of it, the final stance or lack of it, is decided. Also, the Prop 8 decision made by US district Court's Vaughn Walker was so comprehensive that to overturn every aspect of it would be very difficult. So it is a huge win, in any sense that matters.

It is a big crack, but it is not nationwide. So to me the job is not done. I find it absurd for the court to wimp out and make DOMA unconstitutional. How the fuck can you in one case say "yea they deserve economic equality" then in the other "we'll leave it up to the states if they want to deny rights, not expand them".

[Brian37]

Why is something that was obviously against "justice and liberty for all" ever against the law in the first place in a free secular society?  Only religion and politics can screw up common sense so well. Just think how wonderful it could be for all if our government was a theocracy. :shock:  :roll:   I hate the fact that Christianity has become political, and idiot politicians that are Christians like Scalia make our laws.  :P     Solitary

They think Christianity invented modern government. But when you point out the Greek and Roman roots, and the Founders warnings against pulpit politics, their delusion crumbles like the piece of shit argument it is and exposes them for the theocrats they want to become. Freedom to the theist, means "only if I am the alpha male and you know your place and don't compete with me".