RPGWatch Forums
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

RPGWatch Forums (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics, Religion & other Controversies (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   Defense of Marriage Act Ruled Unconstitutional (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20984)

Thrasher June 26th, 2013 20:58

Defense of Marriage Act Ruled Unconstitutional
 
A historic day for civil rights advocates.

This 5-4 decision (which surprisingly is supported by Chief Justice Scalia) overturns the DOMA and tells the Mormon morons they have no good argument that gay marriage somehow damages them (duh!). So lower court's ruling that overturns California Proposition 8 (a ban on gay marriage) is upheld.

Drithius June 26th, 2013 21:49

This is a very complicated issue. I am all for equal rights but:
  • You are using the highest court in the land to dictate POLICY. This was never the intention of the Supreme Court.
  • You have a Puritan population electing Puritan officials. Progressive policies are enacted at a snail's pace in Congress not simply due to ineptitude and lobbyists, but based upon actual voters' feelings - ignorant or not.

What the country truly needs is a tax code slashed in half - one not reliant on marital status whatsoever. This would then negate the need for a court to police a country's sentiment towards marriage.

Thrasher June 26th, 2013 21:56

Enforcing the equal protection under the law clause of the constitution is absolutely not setting "policy"; the role of the SCOTUS is to rule on whether the constitution voids any shitty policy proposed by Congress, which includes DOMA.

dteowner June 26th, 2013 22:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thrasher (Post 1061205104)
Enforcing the equal protection under the law clause of the constitution is absolutely not setting "policy"; the role of the SCOTUS is to rule on whether the constitution voids any shitty policy proposed by Congress, which includes DOMA.

Your unabiding love for the Constitution is noted. Appears you're a fickle lover, though.

For my part, more power to 'em. Equal misery for all. ;)

Thrasher June 26th, 2013 22:16

No, not really love for constitution, just want to be clear on SCOTUS's responsibility and how the constitution applied in this case. There's still a lot of bogus out of date crap in the constitution. However, the "equal protection under the law" clause is not crap, and is gold in my mind.

Yeah, divorce court for all! ;)

joxer June 26th, 2013 22:51

I'm really not sure what exactly is this about?

Human rights vs law or something like that?

Thrasher June 26th, 2013 23:01

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposition_8

Gee, that was tough. Try google sometime. :rolleyes:

joxer June 26th, 2013 23:46

So it's about marriage, not about rights of Mormons to live as they want?

Thrasher June 26th, 2013 23:49

Yep. Mormons tried to tell other people how to live. Standard crap.

joxer June 27th, 2013 00:59

Ah, so some minority wants everyone else to live by their standards, instead of respecting others?
IMO, such minority should be banned from this planet. Is a timemachine invented? If yes, send them to the stone age - try to make the arriving location some matriarchy village. Or better yet, send them to old Turkey in a harem. Perhaps they'd learn a thing or two.

Corwin June 27th, 2013 01:42

While I am in no way a supporter of Mormonism, this site does not permit racist and other such comments. Please do not attack minority groups with vitriol; it is unwarranted and not appreciated. Some of our posters may even be Mormons.

Omega June 27th, 2013 01:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thrasher (Post 1061205125)

Fixed. Ah, much better. :)

Thrasher June 27th, 2013 02:35

Oh, nice! I need to look into Firefox automatically using it.

Zloth June 27th, 2013 02:39

!?!? Prop 8 is not a Mormon law. They were big backers for sure but if they were the only backers that law would never have been passed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drithius (Post 1061205101)
You are using the highest court in the land to dictate POLICY. This was never the intention of the Supreme Court.

Huh? All they did was strike down a portion of a law that they see as unconstitutional. That's what they do.
Quote:

You have a Puritan population electing Puritan officials. Progressive policies are enacted at a snail's pace in Congress not simply due to ineptitude and lobbyists, but based upon actual voters' feelings - ignorant or not.
To override the constitution of California (or any other state) you need a constitutional amendment, not a simple law passed by the majority at the time. That's why so many states went to the trouble to ban gay marriage in their own constitutions.

Quote:

What the country truly needs is a tax code slashed in half - one not reliant on marital status whatsoever. This would then negate the need for a court to police a country's sentiment towards marriage.
Eh, sorta. Co-habitation is a pretty strong economic advantage as the couple gets to share so many things. Still, married people may not be living together and unmarried people may be living together so it's not as good an indicator as it was back in the 1950's.


So next on the list would be DOMA's law saying states don't have to recognize another state's marriage license when the couple is of the same gender. Given today's ruling, that doesn't sound too hard to crush. Then, after a mad flurry of out-of-state weddings, this game will be pretty much over.

Thrasher June 27th, 2013 02:49

Oh I didn't mean to imply that Prop 8 is Mormon law, just they were the most determined backer. A lot of money came from out of state to get Prop 8 on the ballot and propagandized in commercials and finally defended in court (the state refused to defend it eventually). A big part (almost half) of the funding was pushed by the Mormon church. Nice separation of church and state there, eh? They were not only laughed out of court, but should have their tax exempt status removed.

Quote:

In 2010, the California Fair Political Practices Commission fined the LDS church for failing to follow campaign disclosure policies during the last two weeks leading up to the election, which amounted to $37,000 in non-monetary contributions. They were fined $5,538
.

Omega June 27th, 2013 02:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thrasher (Post 1061205151)
Oh, nice! I need to look into Firefox automatically using it.

The disadvantage of Duckduckgo is it can't find images. StartPage can, I have no experience with the latter though, just learned about it after having found Prism-Break this evening. Prism-break provides a list of free alternatives to proprietary software if you want to opt out of Prism

blatantninja June 27th, 2013 05:00

What was interesting to me was that the ruling wasn't really based on equal protection (they specifically did not list homosexuals as a protected class), but rather that they fell back on a Federalism argument, which given the current makeup of the court and our elected officials, is surprising. I think if it had only been argued on the basis of Equal Protection, the ruling would have gone the other way.

Thrasher June 27th, 2013 05:49

No, not exclusively unless this wiki is wrong.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Windsor
Quote:

Section 3 of DOMA was ruled unconstitutional "as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment" on June 26, 2013.
Here is the ruling and quote from it:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions…2-307_g2bh.pdf
Quote:

By seeking to injure the very class New York seeks to protect,DOMA violates basic due process and equal protection principles applicable to the Federal Government.
Federalism is in the mix, but this statement says that due process in the Federal constitution has precedence over Federalism.

blatantninja June 27th, 2013 14:16

Hmm, well what I first read (right after the ruling) was different than what you've posted, so maybe I was incorrect.

Thrasher June 27th, 2013 18:44

There is a lot of bad info posing as journalism. Another detail is that there are separate rulings/opinions on prop 8 vs doma. Different votes, rationale, briefs, etc. I think that's where we are crossing wires.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:39.
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch