General Discussion

99Forever

(14,524 posts)

15. Fingers crossed that...

Tue Mar 26, 2013, 01:12 PM

Mar 2013

.. this blatant and ugly discrimination will finally be ending.

But with what has come out of the SCOTUS in recent years, I remain skeptical that they will do the right thing.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

101 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Defense gets pounded by Supreme Court Justices [View all] cali Mar 2013 OP

if the effects are "unknown", then we cannot know that they are harmful. logic apparently niyad Mar 2013 #1

add to that that there is no evidence, after nearly 9 years of marriage equality cali Mar 2013 #2

I keep trying to figure out how such braindead types manage to function at any level. niyad Mar 2013 #4

The only harm done in MA Fearless Mar 2013 #25

You mean this did not happen? Agschmid Mar 2013 #47

Lol. Fearless Mar 2013 #89

the only harm done NoQuarter Mar 2013 #68

How so? JDPriestly Mar 2013 #76

I know EXACTLY what the effects will be. cliffordu Mar 2013 #3

+1 SoonerPride Mar 2013 #5

and the wedding industry will make a few more dollars, possibly creating jobs. wouldn't this be niyad Mar 2013 #6

Yep. cliffordu Mar 2013 #7

Absolutely REACTIVATED IN CT Mar 2013 #26

Hopefully with a dash of "love" or a pinch of "lust"... but yes it is. Agschmid Mar 2013 #49

2. Gay folks will get divorced RoccoR5955 Mar 2013 #59

Always the hopeless romantic.... cliffordu Mar 2013 #92

if the effects are "unknown", then we cannot know that they are harmful. logic apparently AlbertCat Mar 2013 #43

+ 1 truegrit44 Mar 2013 #94

Maybe they are referring to the "GOD" effect Heather MC Mar 2013 #79

Infertile hetero couples should then be banned from getting married, too. Ikonoklast Mar 2013 #8

And as soon as their offspring attain majority their marriages should be disolved. bluedigger Mar 2013 #14

There should be fertility tests for both partners as part of the marriage application process as wel AlbertCat Mar 2013 #51

er, yeah. bluedigger Mar 2013 #58

I needed to get in the weeds for snark. AlbertCat Mar 2013 #61

Indeed! bluedigger Mar 2013 #62

Agereed ! REACTIVATED IN CT Mar 2013 #27

As an infertile heterosexual AtheistCrusader Mar 2013 #33

+1 ArcticFox Mar 2013 #98

Excellent argument, but it would probably fly right over the mouth breather's heads. sarge43 Mar 2013 #100

Well put. blackspade Mar 2013 #36

The pro-8 lawyer should have been embarrassed to mention procreation JDPriestly Mar 2013 #77

Good news. lark Mar 2013 #9

Kennedy's question was very encouraging. BlueCheese Mar 2013 #10

Could it be that the Supreme Court will once again lead the way on civil rights? SoonerPride Mar 2013 #11

Explain-- you don't think they'll rule the right way on this? BlueCheese Mar 2013 #12

I think it will be a narrow decision applying only to CA SoonerPride Mar 2013 #16

They would have a hard time keeping you from marraige in OK then, when California loses. Ikonoklast Mar 2013 #19

Precisely Sherman A1 Mar 2013 #22

Not necessarily. SoonerPride Mar 2013 #30

Well, a possible scenario is Prop8 goes down, but DOMA stands. AtheistCrusader Mar 2013 #34

That seems less likely SoonerPride Mar 2013 #39

They should but they won't because they want to control this. AtheistCrusader Mar 2013 #46

Prop 8 could be a very narrow ruling that applies to CA only wryter2000 Mar 2013 #65

No, they could rule that the people protecting the law lack standing jeff47 Mar 2013 #38

Not quite. morningfog Mar 2013 #86

My feeling is that DOMA is dead for two reasons; the Fourteenth Amendment and Loving vs Virginia. Ikonoklast Mar 2013 #87

But why? angrychair Mar 2013 #21

Because they had a right and then that right was taken away by Prop 8 SoonerPride Mar 2013 #29

Unfortunately, the courts often do seem to find a way to weasel out of tough spots... BlueCheese Mar 2013 #32

I see your point angrychair Mar 2013 #48

Thank you. 27 years and counting.... SoonerPride Mar 2013 #54

Standing jeff47 Mar 2013 #41

It was my belief that the USSC does not hear cases filed by those with no standing. Ikonoklast Mar 2013 #66

Appellate courts decided they did have standing jeff47 Mar 2013 #70

Thanks for the answer. You may be right. BlueCheese Mar 2013 #31

And John Robert's is a wild card... awoke_in_2003 Mar 2013 #83

You never know. I thought it was his adopted children that might Hekate Mar 2013 #93

My Wife had a hysterectomy at age 47, just before we got married louis c Mar 2013 #13

Beautiful couple. LoisB Mar 2013 #18

Great photo TBF Mar 2013 #23

You look great together! csziggy Mar 2013 #52

an early happy 10th anniversary to a beautiful couple, and wishing you many, many more. niyad Mar 2013 #73

Thanks for sharing such a beautiful picture mercymechap Mar 2013 #78

Both my husband and myself are surgically sterile. sarge43 Mar 2013 #101

Fingers crossed that... 99Forever Mar 2013 #15

The Supreme Court really has a chance to make history here and do the right thing. Nye Bevan Mar 2013 #17

So...should everyone be tested for fertility before a marriage license is issued? Should LoisB Mar 2013 #20

The "procreation" argument is the only thing they've got NYC Liberal Mar 2013 #24

This case was already decided in the last episode of Boston Legal frazzled Mar 2013 #28

Vasectomy is an automatic annulment then? One_Life_To_Give Mar 2013 #35

... and menopause ... Myrina Mar 2013 #42

Alot of Tax revenue One_Life_To_Give Mar 2013 #50

Justice Sotomayor was educating Mr. Cooper about menopause. Manifestor_of_Light Mar 2013 #91

They probably do know it in theory, but it is so remote from where they live... Hekate Mar 2013 #95

Scalia...figures! sheshe2 Mar 2013 #37

Keeping in mind that THIS is perfectly okay... Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2013 #40

Making fun of people's appearance now? tkmorris Mar 2013 #44

+1 n/t Agschmid Mar 2013 #53

You just described the picture perfectly. Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2013 #57

Are they cousins, RoccoR5955 Mar 2013 #60

Some families are so broken they don't even KNOW if they are related. Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2013 #64

this is for real? cousins? a renfaire gag? please identify. niyad Mar 2013 #75

You decide.... Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2013 #82

Why make fun of people? n-t Logical Mar 2013 #90

Maybe because they feel they're superior. Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2013 #96

tigerram Tigerram Mar 2013 #45

welcome to DU--that is what one of my friends says--they have the right to be as miserable niyad Mar 2013 #74

This quote is from a lawyer? Fantastic Anarchist Mar 2013 #55

There is no defense against social injustice. Rex Mar 2013 #56

How can the effects be "unknown" wryter2000 Mar 2013 #63

Loving v. Virginia really should have settled this issue once and for all. ohheckyeah Mar 2013 #67

Olson mentioned it a lot in his argument. nt Lex Mar 2013 #80

Roberts dissapoints pokerfan Mar 2013 #69

This guy actually got a degree? That is the most asinine statement I've ever read. Ikonoklast Mar 2013 #84

Even the procreation "logic" is better than whatever reasoning led Roberts to make that idiotic NYC Liberal Mar 2013 #85

Does that mean that people who can't, or choose not to, have children are barred from marriage? Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2013 #71

Procreation??? angrychair Mar 2013 #72

It is an argument opponents of same-sex marriage make all the time. Lex Mar 2013 #81

The standing issue is what will own them Alcibiades Mar 2013 #88

Is discrimination ok as long as it has a long history? ArcticFox Mar 2013 #97

Crickets going, "Chirp chirp chirp" tell the story... nikto Mar 2013 #99