SCOTUS: same-sex marriage decisions - Live Thread (Decisions at 97, 194, & 217)

Free Republic | 06/26/2013 | BuckeyeTexan

[BuckeyeTexan]

You can read live reporting on the decisions at SCOTUSblog

[BuckeyeTexan]

FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.

[mylife]

The entire issue that there can be same sex marriage is a red herring to break church doctrine.

They can legislate civil unions all day long, but marriage is a sacrament of the Church.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Agreed.

[Private_Sector_Does_It_Better]

These two are not going to turn out well.

Hope I’m wrong.

[max americana]

Maybe. Maybe not. The 5-4 decision today for Voting rights was a bone thrown to conservatives. Tomorrow might be in favor of libtards, or whatever Odumbo commands Roberts.

[OneWingedShark]

They can legislate civil unions all day long, but marriage is a sacrament of the Church.

That's what people don't seem to understand — I've been accused of supporting the homosexual agenda because I assert that marriage is not properly within the authority of the State (certainly not the FedGov). Indeed, putting that authority into the State's hands is the best way for it to play into the homosexual agenda, because once you establish that it's a legal )State) issue, they'll throw out all religious-argument and use their authority to define it [marriage] as they see fit.

[Lmo56]

I think SCOTUS will “86” DOMA within states that allow gay marriage - and take a pass on the Prop 8 case at this time.

That is, SCOTUS will rule that federal benefits will be given to gay couples in states that allow gay marriage. And, SCOTUS will overturn lower federal court rulings on Prop 8 and leave it intact - since it was PROPERLY voted on by the residents of CA.

The upshot will be a ruling that “marriage” is an institution controlled by the states - and in states that allow it, federal benefits have to be conferred to gay couples.

However, in states that allow gay marriage, religious institutions WILL NOT be required to perform gay wedding services [if they object].

[JennysCool]

Agreed, but no one is following the money. Heterosexual couples are more and more living together without marriage. Gay couples are begging for marriage.

Who benefits?

Divorce lawyers. And I'm not kidding.

[mylife]

I have been screaming it for ages.
It is about infiltrating the Church via the Gov.

Just exchange a few words to confuse the rubes.

[mylife]

There is some truth in this but it is a separate phenomena to what is happening.

[JennysCool]

Just to add an addendum to my earlier post: Washington is completely composed of lawyers and those who work for lawyers. When you realize that, everything that gets done at all levels of government makes a perverse sense. It always benefits lawyers.

Shakespeare was right, all those years ago ...

[snarkytart]

I agree.

[Viennacon]

All I will say is that if I were a polygamist or a zoophile, I would have an airtight case for recognition, that is if our court rules homosexual ‘marriage’ a right. There is no justification not to expand it further. Kennedy is with the rats this time, and Roberts may jump.

[Just mythoughts]

That's what people don't seem to understand — I've been accused of “supporting the homosexual agenda” because I assert that marriage is not properly within the authority of the State (certainly not the FedGov). Indeed, putting that authority into the State's hands is the best way for it to play into the “homosexual agenda”, because once you establish that it's a legal )State) issue, they'll throw out all religious-argument and use their authority to define it [marriage] as they see fit

Ah, our founding fathers expected and stated that 'we the people' are government, not a bunch of overpaid lawyers dressing up in black robes, claiming supremacy. This bunch is messing in God's territory if they think they can decide perverts have rights to 'marry'.

[JennysCool]

Nope. See my #12. Washington is all about lawyers ... Congress is lawyers, those who deal with Congress are lawyers, there are a zillion law clerks and just-graduated lawyers dedicated to representing the firm whatever the firm wants them to do. The flourishing and enriching of the legal industry is everything Washington is about. I'm just plain stunned that most people don't grasp this.

This issue has nothing to do with "gay rights" or anything that amorphous. This has to do with a gigantic new gold mine for lawyers. Period.

[OneWingedShark]

This bunch is messing in God's territory if they think they can decide perverts have rights to 'marry'.

*nod* -- On a somewhat tangential note: I was reading this thread and thought to myself, we may see, in our lifetimes, Christian missionaries from Africa preaching in America.

[mylife]

Well, you do have a point.

[uscga77]

On the eve of the Supreme Court decision I say: Only one Judge can define marriage. The one who created heaven and earth and sent his Son to redeem us. So decide what they may, the truth remains: “A man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” God have mercy,

[JSDude1]

I’ve already seen South Korean missionaries on college campuses, it’s happening! (And just in time, because OUR culture is so anti-Christian, and Biblically ignorant at the moment)..