Defense of marriage act ruled unconstitutional

[_rallychild]

Homosexuals have always been able to live together as lifetime partners if they wanted to, and legally pass on property etc. (through living wills and other legal instruments) in the normal manner. Homosexual marriage is purely an ideological movement who's core purpose is the total redefinition of the concept of marriage, family, and gender relations, the underlying aim of which is to hasten the complete (as far as is possible) destruction of the natural family, traditional marriage, and the mediating Judeo-Christian norms and boundaries of this civilizational (and civilizing) institution.

CFR

Also, Droopy, what is a "natural family"? Would a polygamous family be considered "natural"?

In the words of good 'ol Bill O'Reilly: "If you're going to argue in politics on the basis of religious ideals, you're going to lose," Or something like that.

[_rallychild]

I like how you start out arguing that it matters very little and finish with predicting the end of civilization.

lol

[_Darth J]

A hundred bucks says Droopy has not read the slip opinion in United States v. Windsor.

That's a pretty schlocky low budget post-apocalypse action move their, Darth. I didn't know you liked low-budget, Road Warrior rip-off schlock like that.

It takes all kinds...

I should have known I was in over my head trying to tangle with an intellect like yours.

[_bcspace]

"The decision leaves in place another provision in the law that says no state is required to recognize gay marriages performed in any other state."

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-doma-supreme-court-ruling-20130626,0,6846934.story

[_palerobber]

i hear a lot of media commentators saying this is a narrow decision in that in only affects people in those 12 states + DC where gay marriage in legal. such statements may be technically correct but miss the big picture on the enormous positive effect of this ruling...

every single gay person in the United States can now obtain all the federal benefits of marriage.

federally recognized marriage licenses are now available on both coasts and in the midwest. with more outlets coming soon.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

The the Supreme Court Decisions thread over on the MADBoard has already been locked. I guess the mods did so before anyone over there had a chance to predict the end of civilization as a result of the rulings. Perhaps someone over there was following Droopy here and could see what was coming.

MDB: Usually ahead of the pack.

That's how the nuts over there handle news they disagree with -- they just censor the ability to discuss it. I can't believe anyone would want to post over there with that kind of censorship. MDB RULES!

[_Baker]

"The decision leaves in place another provision in the law that says no state is required to recognize gay marriages performed in any other state."

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-doma-supreme-court-ruling-20130626,0,6846934.story

The decision is a door wide open for challenges of such state bans on equal protection grounds. Give it time, and the full magnitude of the decision will be realized.

[_Darth J]

"The decision leaves in place another provision in the law that says no state is required to recognize gay marriages performed in any other state."

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-doma-supreme-court-ruling-20130626,0,6846934.story

bcspace, was Section 2 of DOMA at issue in United States v. Windsor?

___Yes ___No

Under Article III of the Constitution of the United States, do federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction to render advisory opinions on issues that are not before them?

___Yes ___No

Under Article I of the Constitution, can Congress legislatively repeal the full faith and credit clause found in Article IV, Section I of the Constitution of the United States?

___Yes ___No

Are there at this moment any pending federal lawsuits claiming that the full faith and credit clause requires states to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states?

___Yes ___No

Do you know anyone, including yourself, who has moved to a different state after getting married? Did you or this third party have to get re-married in their new resident state? If not, why not?

_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________

[_Fence Sitter]

The the Supreme Court Decisions thread over on the MADBoard has already been locked. I guess the mods did so before anyone over there had a chance to predict the end of civilization as a result of the rulings. Perhaps someone over there was following Droopy here and could see what was coming.

MDB: Usually ahead of the pack.

That's how the nuts over there handle news they disagree with -- they just censor the ability to discuss it. I can't believe anyone would want to post over there with that kind of censorship. MDB RULES!

USU78 predicted the following as a result of today's decisions.

It's one day closer to a shooting war against the LDS Church, its members and leaders.

USU78 has claimed in the past he can spot homosexuals by the "lilt in their voice".

[_Rollo Tomasi]

USU78 predicted the following as a result of today's decisions.

It's one day closer to a shooting war against the LDS Church, its members and leaders.

A "shooting war"? Is he being literal? If so, he seems to have gone far over the edge. That guy is scary.