US Supreme Court to Hear Case on Same-Sex Marriage

[Spectral]

The difference is you dont choose to be black or white, but you choose to be gay

Let's put aside the most obvious flaw with this comment and focus on the legally relevant part - you actually do choose to be with someone of another race. While you can't choose your own race, you can choose who you're marrying. As such, every argument against gay marriage is identical to arguments against interracial marriage, meaning they don't hold any legal water.

[Dispersedshadow]

The way America is going, which is downhill, the DOMA will be overtuned with every SC judge voting to throw it out. Emperor Obama will claim it's a great victory for freedom and continue to fiddle as his country falls deeper into debt slavery.

The only thing you left out is how China is secretly prepping all our men to be male brides for their overabundance of young males.

[MaximusRex]

I'm fine with gay couples being couples, I just dislike the attempt to misuse a word's definition. If for the entirety of the word "marriage" it was defined as "A union between two people" and not "A union between a man and woman" then I would be fine with them "getting married."

Sure, there's always the argument of "Just change the definition" etc, but I don't feel you should be forced to change the definition of a word just because a small group of people demand it. I'm fine with them having the same tax breaks and all that, but don't change the definition of a word.

Definition has already been changed: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marriage

[Azutael]

About time I would say, ridiculous that a modern country does not allow same sex marriage. Well some states in the U.S do, but still.

[Spectral]

Emperor Obama is secretly preparing for a homosexual orgy drenched in the blood of a thousand aborted fetuses which will bring about a thousand years of liberal darkness.

My understanding is that this was chronicled during his campaign: http://www.theonion.com/articles/oba...-age-of,29478/

[semaphore]

The difference is you dont choose to be black or white, but you choose to be gay

You mean the actual difference is that ignorant people thinks you choose to be gay.

[Themius]

At a guess from what I understand of the constitution. The Government of the United States of America has no clause about marriage in the constitution. But it has a Clause about the establishment of a State Religion.

What this means with the two issues that they have to decide on is the Religious belief that marriage is between a man and a woman, which has been placed into several State Constitutions. On this part the judges if they are true to the constitution have no choice but to over turn a law based on religion.

The Second part is related but might have an even larger impact on the world, and that is does the Federal Government recognize a same sex marriage. On this if they find in favor on the first part than Gay Marriage is universally Legal in the US and the second part is automatic, however in the off chance they say no, they can shut down gay marriage federally.

My take on it is simple the bias against gay marriage comes only from religion. The United States was founded to be a secular state with no favoritism towards a religion.

The courts have treated marriage as a civil liberty and think of it as such. Just when it comes to straight couples though. Which is discrimination.

---------- Post added 2012-12-08 at 12:02 AM ----------

I have a problem with ALL marriages and think they should ALL be made illegal. The financial benefits of being married is discriminatory to single people. Married people get all kinds of tax deductions and benefits that us single people dont get which in turn means they get more money.

---------- Post added 2012-12-07 at 11:41 PM ----------



The difference is you dont choose to be black or white, but you choose to be gay

Oh right... I chose to be part of a sexuality many people don't like for some reason which has led to some very stressful times through my life. Tell me Orlong, when did you "decide" to "become" straight.

[Gothicshark]

Here is my guess.

X is the support of DORMA, 1 legalizes gay Marriage, -wildcard can go either way

x Antonin Scalia
- Anthony Kennedy
x Clarence Thomas
1 Ruth Bader Ginsburg
1 Stephen Breyer
x John G. Roberts†
x Samuel Alito
1 Sonia Sotomayor
1 Elena Kagan

As you see it can go either way.

---------- Post added 2012-12-07 at 09:06 PM ----------

Is there actually something wrong with seperate but equal?

Yes, the whole concept is a form of discrimination.

[Ayla]

Definition has already been changed:

the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage>

It does not say equal to, or recognized as or anything of the sort. But, thats just my take on it. I want to see same sex marriage, but I don't think this is going anywhere. Webster needs to change the definition to

The state of 2 individuals in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law. Then you can play the unconstitutional game.

[MaximusRex]

I have a problem with ALL marriages and think they should ALL be made illegal. The financial benefits of being married is discriminatory to single people. Married people get all kinds of tax deductions and benefits that us single people dont get which in turn means they get more money.

---------- Post added 2012-12-07 at 11:41 PM ----------



The difference is you dont choose to be black or white, but you choose to be gay

Actually, sexual orientation/gender identity isn't a choice, its biological, most likely cause by the levels of various hormones that the fetus is exposed to during development.

Over 400 species have been observed to have homosexual and bi-sexual encounters, and just last week there was an article on CNN.com showing a female deer with antlers, so basically that deer was transgendered.

Only 1 species has been observed to be homophobic however, making that actually the more freakish behavior, but medical studies tend to indicate that the more homophobic a person is the more likely they are to exhibit homosexual arousal, and while it needs more study, it might suggest that homophobes are homosexuals that lashing out due to shame and/or denial.

Kinsey's research also indicates that there is a range of degree of sexuality, creating a 7 point scale going from exclusively Hetrosexual, to various degrees bi-sexuality, to exclusively Homosexual.

Since the subject is still mostly not discussed maturely this probably leads to a great many people having confused feelings about their same/opposite sex attraction levels.

[Rukentuts]

My understanding is that this was chronicled during his campaign: http://www.theonion.com/articles/oba...-age-of,29478/

That's actually exactly what I was thinking of when I posted haha.

[Gothicshark]

I have a problem with ALL marriages and think they should ALL be made illegal. The financial benefits of being married is discriminatory to single people. Married people get all kinds of tax deductions and benefits that us single people dont get which in turn means they get more money.

---------- Post added 2012-12-07 at 11:41 PM ----------



The difference is you dont choose to be black or white, but you choose to be gay

1. I personally think that the concept of Marriage is a religious one and the federal government should stricken all marriage laws from the books, and institute a 'legal union of humans'. This would be how you gain all the rights that marriage gets. This way Churches can decide how to define the marriages they preform and the state just has a legal contract. at the same time I do not think it is unfair that married couples get lower taxes, they have additional expenses that single people do not. Especially if they have children, and yes Gay couples should have the same opportunity to raise children.

2. Homosexuality has been proven to be based on biological markers and genetics. Granted many scientist are refusing to post the full findings for fear they can be used for discrimination. Did you choose to be straight, or did it just come naturally to you. This is something people tend to forget when they say it's a choice.

[bekilrwale]

About time I would say, ridiculous that a modern country does not allow same sex marriage. Well some states in the U.S do, but still.

50 years from now I bet a large majority of our population will find it unbelievable that we waited this long to allow same sex marriage. Here's hoping the SC doe the right damn thing.

[Gothicshark]

The courts have treated marriage as a civil liberty and think of it as such. Just when it comes to straight couples though. Which is discrimination.

---------- Post added 2012-12-08 at 12:02 AM ----------



Oh right... I chose to be part of a sexuality many people don't like for some reason which has led to some very stressful times through my life. Tell me Orlong, when did you "decide" to "become" straight.

If they take the stance it's a civil liberty it can go either way, if they look at it as choosing a state belief than marriage discrimination ends because the government will use a new system of Civil Unions.

Honestly from a history stand point it is really interesting to see what happens. As someone who would like to marry same sex I am hoping for a win for my side.

[Spectral]

That's actually exactly what I was thinking of when I posted haha.

I thought so! The phrasing was too close. Everyone should see that though, it's just too damned good.

[Themius]

If they take the stance it's a civil liberty it can go either way, if they look at it as choosing a state belief than marriage discrimination ends because the government will use a new system of Civil Unions.

Honestly from a history stand point it is really interesting to see what happens. As someone who would like to marry same sex I am hoping for a win for my side.

If they take the stance Marriage is a civil liberty they would have to force states that have banned gay marriage to unban gay marriage, and give them the ultimatum of "ban all marriages" or "accept gay marriages" That's how it "should" go since no state has the right to ban liberties to one specific group.

[herpecin]

every time someone brings DOMA up i say the same thing to them; i would support any law restricting marriage to a man and woman, provided that divorce and annulments became illegal.

when over 50% of marriages end in divorce after only a few years, the whole "sanctity of marriage" crap doesn't hold water.

[Gothicshark]

If they take the stance Marriage is a civil liberty they would have to force states that have banned gay marriage to unban gay marriage, and give them the ultimatum of "ban all marriages" or "accept gay marriages" That's how it "should" go since no state has the right to ban liberties to one specific group.

I agree with your testament but look at the list of judges.
5 conservative 4 liberal, of the Conservatives one has taken both liberal and conservative stances in a unpredictable manner. One has voted Christian Right every-time. Of the 4 liberals the two have a somewhat conservative track record. So this really is not an easy to predict out come.

[lolo855]

No, it's been around for thousands of years. Other cultures may have had same sex unions but that's not the same as now, people also used to get stoned for being gay.

Actually you'd only get stoned if you lived in a Muslim country. Look at the Greeks, the Romans, etc.

Plenty of gays all around there and no one made a big deal of it.
It was even normal practice, woman were fore kids, men were for pleasure.

[stumpy]

Actually you'd only get stoned if you lived in a Muslim country. Look at the Greeks, the Romans, etc.

Plenty of gays all around there and no one made a big deal of it.
It was even normal practice, woman were fore kids, men were for pleasure.

The Hebrews were stoning people waaaaay before Islam existed.