Supreme Court declares US-wide right to same-sex marriage

[JDGRUEN]

A few problems with the gay lifestyle:

http://www.shakinandshinin.org/contents/homosexuality/homosexualParentingPlacingChildrenAtRisk-Part2.html

Boy are you in for it now, as JDGRUEN will surely be along any moment to tell you that shakinandshinin.org is a far-right rag and always supports the religious line.

You know the old adage about Assumptions ... well it applies to you here - I have never heard of shakin and whatever, I am not far right - of course from the vantage point of someone teetering on the far left cliff I could as a Principled Constitutional Conservative look far right to you... and I am only barely Christian - only by birth... But you do know everything don't you.?

[JDGRUEN]

The large scale non acceptance of the current ruling (in the hearts and minds of people) who see it as nothing more than legislating from the bench to force social change will work to create a hollow victory. It will legally be 'the law of the land but much of society will run away from it.

You're just prognosticating. If you take a look at the amicus briefs filed on behalf of the petitioners, you'll see a huge groundswell of support from big business, academia and human rights groups, while those filed on behalf of the respondents were heavily represented by old farts, I mean conservative lobbying groups and the clergy. Some of these were positively bizarre, like "Same-sex attracted men and their wives".

"a huge groundswell of support from big business, academia and human rights groups" - everyone but the people - going on 60 million voting adults.

[Jingthing]

Nope.

Even before the ruling a significant majority of U.S. states already allowed same sex marriage, it was recognized federally, and polls consistently showing majority support and among younger people large majority support.

Deal with it.

You can't take it away now.

[Jingthing]

When this decision was rendered was a great day in America.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's exactly right!

[pegman]

When this decision was rendered was a great day in America.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Especially in the Deep South. I read somewhere, maybe on the net, that +60% of their men were closet gays. A new husband for L.Graham could make him the 1st WhiteHouse 1st man not Bubba Clinton like many were thinking.

[pegman]

http://www.shakinandshinin.org/contents/homosexuality/homosexualParentingPlacingChildrenAtRisk-Part2.html[/url]

As a Canadian from a major ctr I call BS! The Family Research Council areBible nuts. Science truth and faith believers are incompatible. There is no God and these nut bars should not be eligible for degrees. Lower life spans? Maybe for a period of time in Vancouver in the '80s during the aids epidemic, not before or since.

[Chicog]

Let's see now.

You know African American men have a shorter lifespan than white American men.

According to the anti-gay activists "logic" those that are alive should not be allowed under the law the marry or have children.

That would not be seen as constitutional today and it follows that discriminating against GLBT Americans based on their identity which may or may not be associated with higher rates of certain problems should not be constitutional either.

Shorter life-spans are but one factor among many that make homosexuals poor parents. I listed a few of these in my last post. A homo-family is an extremely harmful environment for children to be raised in and even gays know this to be true if they are honest about their own lives. Something which is unfortunately rare in gay activists. I don't have a problem with consenting adults engaging in gay sex if they choose; but it is not right to place children in these dysfunctional home environments.

It's not right to place children in any dysfunctional home environments. And the heterosexual world is riddled with them.

But I don't think you know much about parenting and kids these days, and are simply being judgemental because you can't adapt to changes in society.

There is no longer any stigma attached to growing up in a same sex family, or growing up gay, except in those places where those kids' peers are taught by their parents to be bigots from a very young age.

Which is what I call a dysfunctional home environment.

[Publicus]

Perhaps you are not as well-informed about the USA as you seem to think you are. Legitimizing polygamy has been part of this discussion since the issue of gay marriage first came up and "interest" is not required to get a case in front of the Supreme Court. All that is needed is the right case and they already exist.

Montana Polygamist Seeks ‘Legitimacy’ After Supreme Court Ruling

http://time.com/3944579/montana-polygamy-gay-marriage/

You say this was "part of this discussion" but this case was filed after the Supreme Court ruling.

It might have given them encouragement, I agree, but that doesn't mean it was a significant issue beforehand.

In fact he might well have decided to go forward after reading the dissent.

I said that legitimizing polygamy was part of the discussion for years already and that is a fact. The link is to a case that might end up in the Supreme Court someday. It does not matter when it took place. The recent Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage gives it a lot more gravity.

"Someday" is so open ended as to be meaningless and of no significance or consequence. The Court's majority is clear that the ruling means "two" persons and no fewer, no more than two, which constitutes almost everything we need to know about it.

The post is correct that polygamy has been a part of the debate involving DOMA being enacted then overturned by SCOTUS, Prop 8 in California being ruled unconstitutional, and all the rest of it going back some couple of decades at the least, directly up to last week's ruling. However, the conservatives and the far rightists driving the issues have introduced polygamy, and you have done so out of insecurity, fear, and due to being mindlessly tradition bound.

Fact is the right had by the turn of the century accepted that they were losing the gay rights arguments in the larger society with the implications being clear for when the gay rights issues made their way into the courts. So the conservatives and the far right only trotted out polygamy, which has always been marginal, illegal and unconstitutional in the United States.

Polygamy is a strawman; it is bogus. Polygamy is so marginal to American society that its appeal as an issue exists only among the political and cultural marginals themselves. It is estimated that a maximum of only 30,000 Americans total live in ploygamous relationships.

Federal and state governments have consistently let be the people living in polygamy, since 1954, when Americans reacted across the board with a great disapproval to Arizona sheriffs and hundreds of their deputies descending forcefully on a polygamous community. Americans in 1954 expressed their widespread and profound objection to this government action, not because Americans are polygamous, which they are not, but due to the police state nature of the assault against citizens who were minding their own business.

http://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1087&context=articles

Edited July 5, 2015 by Publicus

[Publicus]

A few problems with the gay lifestyle:

"Rate of Intimate Partner Violence within Marriage

A little-reported fact is that homosexual and lesbian relationships are far more violent than are traditional married households:

~ The Bureau of Justice Statistics (U.S. Department of Justice) reports that married women in traditional families experience the lowest rate of violence compared with women in other types of relationships. [46]

~ A report by the Medical Institute for Sexual Health concurred:

It should be noted that most studies of family violence do not differentiate between married and unmarried partner status. Studies that do make these distinctions have found that marriage relationships tend to have the least intimate partner violence when compared to cohabiting or dating relationships. [47]

High Incidence of Mental Health Problems among Homosexuals and Lesbians

A national survey of lesbians published in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology found that 75 percent of the nearly two-thousand respondents had pursued psychological counseling of some kind, many for treatment of long-term depression or sadness:

Among the sample as a whole, there was a distressingly high prevalence of life events and behaviors related to mental health problems. Thirty-seven percent had been physically abused and 32 percent had been raped or sexually attacked. Nineteen percent had been involved in incestuous relationships while growing up. Almost one-third used tobacco on a daily basis and about 30 percent drank alcohol more than once a week; 6 percent drank daily. One in five smoked marijuana more than once a month. Twenty-one percent of the sample had thoughts about suicide sometimes or often and 18 percent had actually tried to kill themselves. ... More than half had felt too nervous to accomplish ordinary activities at some time during the past year and over one-third had been depressed. [48]

Substance Abuse among Lesbians

A study published in Nursing Research found that lesbians are three times more likely to abuse alcohol and to suffer from other compulsive behaviors:

Like most problem drinkers, 32 (91 percent) of the participants had abused other drugs as well as alcohol, and many reported compulsive difficulties with food (34 percent), codependency (29 percent), sex (11 percent), and money (6 percent). Forty-six percent had been heavy drinkers with frequent drunkenness. [49]

Greater Risk for Suicide

~ A study of twins that examined the relationship between homosexuality and suicide, published in the Archives of General Psychiatry, found that homosexuals with same-sex partners were at greater risk for overall mental health problems, and were 6.5 times more likely than their twins to have attempted suicide. The higher rate was not attributable to mental health or substance abuse disorders. [50]

~ Another study published simultaneously in Archives of General Psychiatry followed 1007 individuals from birth. Those classified as gay, lesbian, or bisexual were significantly more likely to have had mental health problems. Significantly, in his comments in the same issue of the journal, D. Bailey cautioned against various speculative explanations of the results, such as the view that "widespread prejudice against homosexual people causes them to be unhappy or worse, mentally ill." [51]

Reduced Life Span

Another factor contributing to the instability of male homosexual households, which raises the possibility of major disruption for children raised in such households, is the significantly reduced life expectancy of male homosexuals. A study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology on the mortality rates of homosexuals concluded:

In a major Canadian centre, life expectancy at age twenty for gay and bisexual men is eight to twenty years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged twenty years will not reach their sixty-fifth birthday. Under even the most liberal assumptions, gay and bisexual men in this urban centre are now experiencing a life expectancy similar to that experienced by all men in Canada in the year 1871. [52]

http://www.shakinandshinin.org/contents/homosexuality/homosexualParentingPlacingChildrenAtRisk-Part2.html

A study of twins that examined the relationship between homosexuality and suicide.....Like most problem drinkers.....suffer from other compulsive behaviors.....respondents had pursued psychological counseling of some kind, many for treatment of long-term depression or sadness.....life expectancy at age twenty for gay and bisexual men is eight to twenty years less than for all men.....cautioned against various speculative explanations of the results, such as the view that "widespread prejudice against homosexual people causes them to be unhappy or worse, mentally ill".......which raises the possibility of.....we estimate that.....

Creation Science.

Full of bent interpretations of fact to include the creating of alleged fact.

Where lelgit challenges do in fact exist, it is better to address them by honest intervention than to celebrate them which is how the post and its sources do indeed proceed.

[Seastallion]

Polygamy is a choice, being black, female or gay is not.

Polygamists can't chose who they love any more than blacks females or gays can and apparently nowadays anything goes in that regard. It won't be long until polygamy will have to be legalized and it will be directly related to this ruling. It would be hypocritical for the SCOTUS to deny people who love multiple partners the same rights as everyone else - and so on and so forth.

OK, fine.

So, why is eventual legal polygamy an argument against the SCOTUS decision?

[Loptr]

It appears the SCOTUS have generated some backlash over recent rulings... Including their stretch at creating legislation concerning gay marriage instead of interpreting the constitutionality of current laws passed by the legislative branch...

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/246854-poll-support-grows-for-states-to-ignore-federal-courts

[Publicus]

Mainstream American society accepts or actively supports SCOTUS decisions and rulings of late, from DOMA being declared unconstitutional to the Court's reading of the Constitution that same-sex marriage is as legit as opposite sex marriage is.

It's the most conservative Republicans and the most far out rightists that largely vote Republican who continue to object, primarily now by trying to raise polygamy which in the US is marginal, illegal, unconstitutional.

The Constitution does not state anything specific about marriage, yet Congress, the President and SCOTUS have created laws on it since way back when, which is because the Constitution is a source document, it is not a rule book as exists, for instance, in a given sport.

There's no backlash from the larger society. There are only the conservatives, Republicans especially but not exclusively, howling away, driven by the far right that controls conservatives on the issue(s).

Conservatives keep losing on the social issues yet their succession of losses only drives them further out on their ever expanding margin of mainstream society. Polygamy is an issue that has been out there in lunar orbit for a very long time and the far out right has made a grab at it to see if they can haul it in. They cannot.

[arunsakda]

Polygamy is a choice, being black, female or gay is not.

Polygamists can't chose who they love any more than blacks females or gays can and apparently nowadays anything goes in that regard. It won't be long until polygamy will have to be legalized and it will be directly related to this ruling. It would be hypocritical for the SCOTUS to deny people who love multiple partners the same rights as everyone else - and so on and so forth.

OK, fine.

So, why is eventual legal polygamy an argument against the SCOTUS decision?

I don't see what is wrong with polygamy anyway as long as practical issues are

dealt with fairly. Do people honestly believe wealthy muslims, mormons, and others in US are not in polygamous relationships already? Legitimizing it might help to deal with benefits fraud and issues with illegitimate kids. Fortunately the question of polygamy is a straw man and nothing to do with this decision, neither is marrying an animal. I actually had to explain to an angry raving right wing Christian cooworker the other day that a dog is not a person, and cannot enter into a valid contract. That is exactly what a state issued marriage is, a contract. A bit of paper to satisfy various authorities. Nothing at all to do with anybody's religion, or the bizaare slippery slopes and agendas feared by irrational right-wing idealougues and their ilk.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited July 6, 2015 by arunsakda

[Scott]

Further discussion of polygamy will be removed. The topic is about the Supreme court ruling on gay marriage.

Those that wish to discuss polygamy can do so in another thread in another section.

[Chicog]

It appears the SCOTUS have generated some backlash over recent rulings... Including their stretch at creating legislation concerning gay marriage instead of interpreting the constitutionality of current laws passed by the legislative branch...

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/246854-poll-support-grows-for-states-to-ignore-federal-courts

Funny isn't it? When Hobby Lobby and Citizens United got their rulings, SCOTUS was the best thing since sliced bread.

A couple of rulings against them and it's populated by apostles of satan.

The best one is Jindal, one of the ones who's been a huge proponent of the "Obama defying the constitution" nonsense but who now advocates scrapping SCOTUS altogether.

What a bunch of feeble-minded jokers.

[mesquite]

From James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal:

‘Progress’ Needs Enemies
The ungracious victory of same-sex marriage.

http://on.wsj.com/1LS08uY

[Jingthing]

Kids with two same sex parents have no reason to refer to them as Mom and Dad.

To anyone who thinks this is that big a deal, you're tripping and living in the past.

Kids often just say PARENTS ... regardless.

Edited July 6, 2015 by Jingthing

[attrayant]

I just checked with a facebook friend who is one member of a same sex household and has two children. He says the kids, 8 and 12, call both of the parents by their first names and have done so ever since they can remember, most likely picking it up from the parents themselves, as children typically do when they start picking up the language.

I don't see a problem with it, unless you start out with the premise that it's somehow bad for a five year old to call his father Jack. But that's a position that'll need a whole lot of justification.

Edited July 6, 2015 by attrayant

[Jingthing]

Two Dads. Two Moms. One Dad. One Mom. Mom and Dad. It's all good (or bad depending on the INDIVIDUAL actual parents involved).

[Chicog]

Nice try but no cigar. Personally, I think it would be less stressful for a kid to tell his friends his parents are divorced or give some other logical explanation for having one parent, rather than try to explain why their mother is a man-mother. Hey, but that's just me. Evidently, this is a very sensitive topic for some of you people.

I'm sorry, I'm just trying to point out the galaxy-sized holes in your logic.

So now it's not a issue of what they call their parents but how they explain them.

I would have thought a teacher in this day and age who sees two men or two women rock up at PTA conferences would probably be able to take a wild guess at the situation without reacting hysterically.

[Jingthing]

Just to add:

It's pretty obvious that the majority of current and future same sex parents are lesbians. Two women.

I would also predict the majority of GLBT American citizens will never marry and among them the majority won't have children either.

The idea here is that GLBT citizens should be treated the same as other citizens in the legalization of their relationships which is also very good for the children to have that, IF there are children.

Edited July 6, 2015 by Jingthing

[Chicog]

Actually, I do get out a lot. I think we just travel in different circles. It may seem perfectly normal for you to see two men married to each other. Maybe you even have a man-wife yourself or you are the other half of a man-man relationship. I just tend to view same sex marriage as a little odd, and believe it is an unhealthy environment to raise children in.

Evidently, same sex marriage is a mute topic, since America has plunged into the depths of depravity making same sex marriages legal. It's certainly nothing to get hysterical over.

I don't know what you mean by "mute topic", but if you think America "has plunged into the depths of depravity" since late June, you see things in a slightly different way to me.

And it seems your view is immutable, so the "trying to understand" bit is really not true, is it?

[Jingthing]

Yes of course the same sex marriage legalization issue is happily settled but the American GLBT civil rights movement carries on. There is so much more to do in remove all anti-gay discriminatory legislation still on the books in so many states.

[arunsakda]

It appears the SCOTUS have generated some backlash over recent rulings... Including their stretch at creating legislation concerning gay marriage instead of interpreting the constitutionality of current laws passed by the legislative branch...

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/246854-poll-support-grows-for-states-to-ignore-federal-courts

Funny isn't it? When Hobby Lobby and Citizens United got their rulings, SCOTUS was the best thing since sliced bread.

A couple of rulings against them and it's populated by apostles of satan.

The best one is Jindal, one of the ones who's been a huge proponent of the "Obama defying the constitution" nonsense but who now advocates scrapping SCOTUS altogether.

What a bunch of feeble-minded jokers.

Exactly. Applaud the decisions they like and any decision these reactionaries do not like is only because of "Judicial Activists who legislate from the bench" and "tyrants". When did they cheer louder than in 2000 when 5 ”sinister figures in black cloaks” handed the Presidency to the actual loser of the 2000 election in the most corrupt decision in the history of the court? The GOP demands total orthodoxy of ideology as well. The howls are never louder than when one of their own appears to cross lines as did Roberts in the 2012 Obamacare case.

There never was anything such as "gay marriage" anyway. Only a simple choice between equality before the law and blatant discrimination.

The right to same-sex marriage has been decided and is final and binding in all states and territories. Marriage equality groups are disbanding, moving on to other things.　

I suggest conservatives do the same and stop worrying about it.

Edited July 6, 2015 by arunsakda

[Scott]

Numerous off-topic, troll, baiting and inflammatory posts and replies have been removed. Suspensions will now be awarded.

[mesquite]

I'm beginning to think this may be much ado about nothing. There won't be many same-sex marriages because so few people are gay.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/07/15/what-percentage-of-the-u-s-population-is-gay-lesbian-or-bisexual/

[JakeSully]

[Berkshire]

It would appear that the Nigerians are just as upset as the right-wingers in America regarding the Supreme Court ruling...

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/06/opinions/nigeria-america-gay-marriage/index.html

So it would make perfect sense if these folks in Nigeria (and certain other African countries), the radical Muslims (i.e., ISIS, Taliban, etc.), and the far right wing of the US, would get together and start their very own anti-gay country. Somewhere in the remote part of dark Africa would be good.

[JakeSully]

It would appear that the Nigerians are just as upset as the right-wingers in America regarding the Supreme Court ruling...

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/06/opinions/nigeria-america-gay-marriage/index.html

So it would make perfect sense if these folks in Nigeria (and certain other African countries), the radical Muslims (i.e., ISIS, Taliban, etc.), and the far right wing of the US, would get together and start their very own anti-gay country. Somewhere in the remote part of dark Africa would be good.

Yeah I suggest Scalia and Thomas and other conservatives who are screaming bloody murder immigrate to a place where they can get 90% support for deporting/ eradicating homosexuality. Paradise for them..maybe the grass truly is greener on the other side.

[arunsakda]

It would appear that the Nigerians are just as upset as the right-wingers in America regarding the Supreme Court ruling...

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/06/opinions/nigeria-america-gay-marriage/index.html

So it would make perfect sense if these folks in Nigeria (and certain other African countries), the radical Muslims (i.e., ISIS, Taliban, etc.), and the far right wing of the US, would get together and start their very own anti-gay country. Somewhere in the remote part of dark Africa would be good.

Yeah I suggest Scalia and Thomas and other conservatives who are screaming bloody murder immigrate to a place where they can get 90% support for deporting/ eradicating homosexuality. Paradise for them..maybe the grass truly is greener on the other side.

Thomas has said he wants to go back to an era when there were no child labor laws..

Fat Tony is a religious fanatic who believes "The Devil" is a real person.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk