Supreme Court Weighing Gay Marriage Cases (free speech, crimes, Obama, financial)

[RaymondChandlerLives]

Originally Posted by banchoi

Not yet they're not. Children are being discriminated against in this regard.

As a regressive leftist it is my duty to change this.

Run it up a flagpole and see who salutes, right-winger.

In the meantime, society marches forward, no thanks to you.

[Dane_in_LA]

Originally Posted by lionsgators

am pretty sure that DOMA really doesn't do anything.

Well, you can start by basking with pride in the fact that Sally Ride's life partner through 27 years was kept from enjoying any Federal benefits that she would have been eligible for, had Sally Ride been a male. It's not as if the nation owes anything to a person like that, right?

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by fitzy24

Did you hear that from their member's only newsletter?

The ACLU even defended NAMBLA in the past..

[wrecking ball]

orly taitz seems to be willing to take it on:

I do not see the decision by SCOTUS as a Gay Day, I see it as states right day. I believe that prop 8 is not dead, there simply need to be a different plaintiff | Dr. Orly Taitz, Esquire

that should be helpful.

[GCharlotte]

Originally Posted by evan83

I'm not a homo, but I was for gay marriage before it was cool.

Today is a great day.

Gay marriage wasn't ruled on today.

[zombocom]

Originally Posted by freemkt

So are jurors free to acquit if they disagree with a law under which a defendant is charged?

Yes. Jury nullification is legal.

[lionsgators]

Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA

Well, you can start by basking with pride in the fact that Sally Ride's life partner through 27 years was kept from enjoying any Federal benefits that she would have been eligible for, had Sally Ride been a male. It's not as if the nation owes anything to a person like that, right?

so as I have said previously, gay marriage is a financial issue. thank you for proving my point. bunch of worthless money grubbing greedy jerks.

[GCharlotte]

Originally Posted by PullMyFinger

It doesn't really mean much except the Federal Gov has washed its hands of the issue.

They didn't wash their hands. Members of a court held their hands under scolding water and scrubbed them with a brush.

[zombocom]

Originally Posted by Oleg Bach

It is as if I stepped through a worm hole and have entered another universe...Why not take this whole concept right into the far future and pass laws of equality were there will be compulsory penis amputations at birth? Why wait - let the progressive move forward 100 years and get to it.

...what?

[pknopp]

Originally Posted by ChrisFromChicago

The Majority of Southerns wanted slavery

The Majority of Germans had no issue arresting and putting away Jews

The Majority does not rule by decree, with the ability to violate rights of others because they see fit We have protections against that. THAT IS WHY we have protections against it

Like the electoral college.