California Voters Approve Gay-Marriage Ban

When your emotions are balanced on a 5 to 4 vote between a bunch of old sweats in the legal profession they would seem to me of a rather fragile nature.

You might say you are married. They might say you are married. But you can never be actually married.

I presume that the USSC takes the view, as of today, that 313 million is quite sufficient and that a managed decline is in order.

bump

Spandi... not even you can rain on my parade today!

Mormon church criticizes Supreme Court rulings on gay marriage
http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2013/06/mormon-church-criticizes-supreme-court-rulings-on-gay-marriage/

Full circle peeps! Thanks SCOTUS!!!!!!!!!!!

Now let's see about feeding the poor by taxing these deadbeat churches...

Finally, something rational on this thread.

BTW, Rex. I know someone is likely to ask you this, so it might as well be me asked in a spirit of friendship:

Are you the husband or the wife?

Alright! Thanks to all for redefining the definition of marriage. You cracked the nut for future redefinition of marriage. I can see the future for plural marriage, marriage between humans and animals. Thank you!!!

Minutes After Supreme Court Strikes Down DOMA, Immigration Judge Stops Deportation Of Married Gay Man
http://thinkprogress.org/immigration/2013/06/26/2220411/doma-immigration-judge-stops-deportation/

A better question neo is whether there is any need to understand the partner.

In my experience the female has been more or less incomprehensible. Such trials are avoided if a male has a male partner as it's as simple as putting the key in the lock of a garden shed door from what little I understand of the matter.

Won't the libertine homosexuals laugh at the ones who choose to embrace a lifetime partner and domestic bliss?

I suppose new editions of Pride and Prejudice will be required to begin--

"It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single person in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife".

How the editors will cope with the rest of Jane Austen I have no clue. Perhaps the book with simply be banned.

Ladies such as Fanny Price will become outlaws.

I prefer being with a monogamous husband (masculine acting and looking, adult man) and also being a husband myself. I like relationships where both of us have an equal say with neither one solely dominating over the other. Not all gays are like that, that is why we LGBT people use a rainbow to represent ourselves. Sexual preference comes in many shades and hues. Some bi guys like effeminate men, some like role playing... I just like being who I am naturally and not messing with roles. This does not mean I dislike feminine things or a little feminine in my man from time to time, It is just a matter of what I prefer most...

No more than libertine heteros laugh at straights that like to marry and stay monogamous...

I'm gonna throw a wrench into this issue of DOMA overthrown by the USSC.

What they, the SC, have done is that voters in California don't count. I think that's a very dangerous precedence.

If we're talking about the US Constitution - and we're not, because they allowed states to suppress voters by requiring government issued ID's.
Since the 19th Amendment outlaws state's regulations against women voters, any laws the suppresses voters - including women - are unConstitutional.

The USSC doesn't understand our Constitution - and to protect it.

That's how I knew to ask the question.

It is a lot.

No one should be able to vote human rights away... All men and women are created equal... It means what it says even if the California electorate was bought off by Mormon propaganda money... What kinda bad precedent is following the constitution setting?

Via the U.S. Department of Defense (http://1.usa.gov/11ImHuy):

"The Department of Defense welcomes the Supreme Court's decision today on the Defense of Marriage Act. The department will immediately begin the process of implementing the Supreme Court's decision in consultation with the Department of Justice and other executive branch agencies. The Department of Defense intends to make the same benefits available to all military spouses -- regardless of sexual orientation -- as soon as possible. That is now the law and it is the right thing to do. Every person who serves our nation in uniform stepped forward with courage and commitment. All that matters is their patriotism, their willingness to serve their country, and their qualifications to do so. Today's ruling helps ensure that all men and women who serve this country can be treated fairly and equally, with the full dignity and respect they so richly deserve."

Yes and some might dread the day it is bought off by homosexual money which they have more of because they don't have a spending machine to cope with.

Are you ready for certain privileges being withdrawn due to not being agreeable?

Think of the howls if Prop 8 had gone the other way and the USSC overturned it. I expect it would be heard on the west coast of the Atlantic ocean.

I see that you had a very good day.

Nice video.

It doesn't matter how votes were influenced; that happens on almost all elections.

We all know about "all men are created equal," but in the US that's still an oxymoron. That's unless you're a WASP who doesn't understand the on-going discrimination against women, gays and lesbians, and minorities.

I'm only talking about the Supreme Court making California voters irrelevant..

That's a dangerous precedence to set for the SC.