Supreme Court Hearing Gay Marriage Argument

[Jaylan]

http://mashable.com/2015/04/28/gay-marriage-supreme-court/?utm_cid=mash-com-Tw-main-link

What vote are you predicting? Im thinking history will be made. Im thinking it goes 5-4 or 6-3 in a way that would make gay marriage legal nation wide.

 

[Stagger Lee]

The wealthy elitist want gay marriage nationwide so that's what the Supreme Court will deliver.

It's not the supreme court's power to decide but they'll decide it anyway. (unconstitutional) Legislation by 5 federal judges.

Gays don't really want state recognized marriages, they want to force all private individuals to fully accept their sexual choices and to be protected as a special class. That's the problem.

Gays could just got gay civil unions bestowing the same rights and benefits legalized through the legislature, and leave private individuals and conscientious objectors such as in the wedding services industry alone. But no it's not about gay unions at all.

 

[( . )( . )]

The farce of gay marriage.

https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2015/03/08/study-gay-marriage-is-a-farce/

What vote are you predicting?

You know the routine. Whichever outcome is more likely to be the most detrimental (short or long term) to the host population. At this point does it really matter?

 

[Peña]

5-4 making a mockery of marriage with a sham marriage. Fringe groups again turining the country upside down.

 

[Mike32ct]

I think it will be 6-3 or even 7-2 due to the RINO factor.

 

[speed dawg]

Serious question.....why can't marriage be defined as a union between and man and woman, AND some other type of agreement be worked out between gays that legally entitles them to each others' sh*t? I don't get that. Why the big deal about the word 'marriage'?

I think this is all another ploy by the people behind the scenes (who are in this for the money), manipulating the do-good sh*t-libs. A reasonable resolution could be had, but that's not the objective.

 

[Jaylan]

5-4 making a mockery of marriage with a sham marriage. Fringe groups again turining the country upside down.

The majority of Americans support equal marriage rights for all Americans. Thats hardly a fringe. Do your research.

Serious question.....why can't marriage be defined as a union between and man and woman, AND some other type of agreement be worked out between gays that legally entitles them to each others' sh*t? I don't get that. Why the big deal about the word 'marriage'?

I think this is all another ploy by the people behind the scenes (who are in this for the money), manipulating the do-good sh*t-libs. A reasonable resolution could be had, but that's not the objective.

Why does it bother you if people are allowed to define marriage any way they want to in their own personal relationships? Why should the government be allowed to deny people the ability to freely define their private life?

The reasonable resolution is that all people should have equal rights in this. Its not like organized religion created marriage...and its not like religious people truly see marriage as so sacred (when you consider infidelity and divorce rates). So I personally see no good argument why all Americans cannot freely define marriage for themselves.

No one will force religious institutions to marry homosexuals. So people need to get over it and let people live their lives. It harms no one if two homosexuals call their long term union marriage. It changes nothing about two heterosexual people's marriage either.

Time to give this one up. 36 states already have it as legal...so there's really no going back now.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Why does it bother you if people are allowed to define marriage any way they want to in their own personal relationships? Why should the government be allowed to deny people the ability to freely define their private life?

It's not defining their private life when they are asking for state benefits, privileges and protections traditionally married couples receive. Neither is forcing wedding service providers to serve gay weddings their private life.

The reasonable resolution is that all people should have equal rights in this.

So why not allow for polygamy, incest etc? Everyone already has equal rights. Any straight, gay male or female can marry the opposite sex.

Its not like organized religion created marriage...and its not like religious people truly see marriage as so sacred (when you consider infidelity and divorce rates). So I personally see no good argument why all Americans cannot freely define marriage for themselves.

First off religion did create marriage and pre-dates history let alone the US government. But it's not even about religion. You can define marriage how ever you want in a private ceremony, but you are asking the state to license it and forcing other private individual to accept your definition of marriage.

No one will force religious institutions to marry homosexuals. So people need to get over it and let people live their lives. It harms no one if two homosexuals call their long term union marriage. It changes nothing about two heterosexual people's marriage either.

BS gays will next demand any church that hosts traditional marriages to host their gay wedding. Besides, gays have already infringed on Christian wedding service providers. It's not about what homosexuals call their union, it's about what the state calls it and forcing others to fully accept it.

 

[Stagger Lee]

5-4 against gay marriage under the Fourteenth Amendment as a constitutional right, 5-4 the other way on gay marriages in some states being forcibly recognize by the states under the comity clause/Full Faith and Credit Clause.

That would be the best case scenario one could expect, but I think it will be 5-4 for gay marriage based on not allowing same-sex marriage is discrimination based on sex.

I think the court will side step the sexual orientation matter. Chief Roberts will tip it 5-4 to require gay marriage based on the argument that not allowing same-sex marriage is discrimination based on a persons sex.

"Sue loves Joe and Tom also loves Joe, but Sue can marry Joe, while Tom can’t, he said. “Why isn’t that a straightforward case of sexual discrimination?” he asked.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/antonin-scalia-and-john-roberts-question-gay-marriage-opponents-2015-4#ixzz3YjC02NFi"

If the Court finds against requiring gay marriage, wouldn't that reverse gay marriage in several states the federal judges forced? I don't see that happening.

 

[speed dawg]

Why does it bother you if people are allowed to define marriage any way they want to in their own personal relationships? Why should the government be allowed to deny people the ability to freely define their private life?

It's like arguing with a woman. When in doubt, shame.

The reasonable resolution is that all people should have equal rights in this. Its not like organized religion created marriage...and its not like religious people truly see marriage as so sacred (when you consider infidelity and divorce rates). So I personally see no good argument why all Americans cannot freely define marriage for themselves.

Well, no, because marriage IS a religious institution, always has been. So if gays want equal rights, so be it. But it isn't a marriage. The government is making a mistake in recognize marriage in any form, if they truly want to separate church and state.

No one will force religious institutions to marry homosexuals.

Yes they will. Yes they absolutely will. It's next on the agenda. At minimum, they will yank their tax exempt status.

So people need to get over it and let people live their lives. Time to give this one up.

When you can't get people to agree, SHAME some more!

 

[amoka]

Serious question.....why can't marriage be defined as a union between and man and woman, AND some other type of agreement be worked out between gays that legally entitles them to each others' sh*t? I don't get that. Why the big deal about the word 'marriage'?

Very comical. What "type of arrangement" would you prefer to be "worked out"? You want it to walk like a duck, quacks like a duck, moves like a duck, but it should not be called a duck?

 

[Peña]

The majority of Americans support equal marriage rights for all Americans. Thats hardly a fringe. Do your research.

Do yours. Only 2% difference. The country is split. Gays are smaller in numbers being fringe telling the majority what it should be.

Why does it bother you if people are allowed to define marriage any way they want to in their want to in their own personal relationships? Why should the government be allowed to deny people the ability to freely define their private life?

Why should a fringe group snap their fingers forcing us to accept a sham marriage as normal? Gays decide they want to be married so we all have to give them what they want. Selfish people trying to steal marriage benefits and wanting fake families saying being different is normal. Personally they are free in their private lives to live freely. Does not mean they should have a right to be married making a mockery of it.

 

[Bible_Belt]

If two dudes can marry, why can't I have two wives? That's what I want to know.

 

[Peña]

If two dudes can marry, why can't I have two wives? That's what I want to know.

I was just going to say that. It should be that way since they turned marriage upside down. The fringe want gays to have legal marriage. Why can't a small group have more than one wife? Gay supporters say why should the government be allowed to deny people the ability to freely define their private life? Shouldn't that apply to me wanting another wife if I want?

The majority of Americans support equal marriage rights for all Americans. Thats hardly a fringe. Do your research.

Do your research. Gay marriage was voted down each time it came on the ballot over 20 years ago. They cried foul each time trying to get it reinstated until they forced the courts to vote on it. The issue should be dead years ago. Government has the authority to define laws. The fringe don't like it so they forced it to be changed.

 

[Stagger Lee]

If two dudes can marry, why can't I have two wives? That's what I want to know.

I want to marry my elderly mother (so I can receive her social security and survivor benefits). Why can't I marry a relative not even the same sex? That's what I want to know. I want a lesbian to make the mother marriage cake too .


Here's what else can happen when gays marry, questions of child support and custody and assets. That's when it's good when it happens to them lol. Christian-made wedding cakes in their ass

Rosie O’Donnell and her ex, Michelle Rounds, are apparently in the middle of a custody battle that just got ugly. According to People Magazine, Rounds has requested sole custody of the couple’s 2-year-old daughter, Dakota, filing the request on Tuesday. Her lawyer stated that Rounds feels as though it is in the child’s best interest to be in her care, and that she will provide a better environment for Dakota. Naturally, Rosie disagrees.


“This is an absurd and desperate attempt to use a child for her own gain,” said Rosie’s lawyer on Tuesday. The two women are now at odds over the child, who many feel is being put in the middle of what is turning out to be a bitter split.

 

[Bokanovsky]

I want to marry my elderly mother (so I can receive her social security and survivor benefits). Why can't I marry a relative not even the same sex? That's what I want to know. I want a lesbian to make the mother marriage cake too .

Why stop with your mother? Marry your dad, uncles and nieces too. Who's to say marriage has to be between two individuals? Speaking of which, why does it have to be an individual? Why can't you marry a corporation? That would be great for income splitting purposes.

 

[LiveFreeX]

The end of America is at hand. Maybe 1 or 2 generations left.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Why stop with your mother? Marry your dad, uncles and nieces too. Who's to say marriage has to be between two individuals? Speaking of which, why does it have to be an individual? Why can't you marry a corporation? That would be great for income splitting purposes.

I know right, but but but polygamy bad, corporation bad, relative bad..only gay good uh cause pro-gays say so!