Posted on 06/26/2013 7:41:40 AM PDT by Deo volente
The U.S. Supreme Court today paved the way for same-sex couples to marry soon in California, effectively leaving intact a lower-court ruling that struck down the state's voter-approved ban on gay marriage.
In a ruling that assures further legal battles, the high court found that backers of Proposition 8 did not have the legal right to defend the voter-approved gay marriage ban in place of the governor and attorney general, who have refused to press appeals of a federal judge's 2010 ruling finding the law unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court ruling, which found it had no legal authority to decide the merits of a challenge to Proposition 8, sends the case back to that original decision -- and the only question now is how quickly same-sex couples can marry and whether that ruling will have immediate statewide effect.
The 5-4 ruling was written by Chief Justice John Roberts.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
The role of government is to "secure the blessings of liberty". . .in this regard the government interest in marriage is proper when focused on protecting the rights of children, who are not yet able to protect their own rights.
Our inalienable rights are endowed to us at conception/birth, which means the first right endowed, in application, is the right for a child to be raised and cared for by the biological father and mother who conceived that child. Other than that, government is not needed because no one has a right to be married. . .gay or otherwise. . .we have a right to an attorney. . but not to a spouse. The true victims of today's ruling are children.
Only if two Constitutional Amendments are passed;
1) Eradication of the 16th Amendment.
2) Any type of chronic Entitlement programs, including Social Security are to be ended with some being "grandfathered" in. Amendment should conclude that the individual States are the only entity that has the power to enact Entitlement programs, not the Federal government. Also States are required to pay for any Entitlement programs internally. Also the Federal Government is not a source of budget overlays in cases where States are deep in debt. Only subsidies in case of natural dissaters or invasion will be allowed.
Also, ditto about spousal visas. What would be your plan?
If not, I don't mind Federal firewalls protecting natural matrimony, because the Federal government has been in the marriage business DECADES before the United States sexual revolution occurred in the 1960s.
Today's ruling just reaffirms the hypocrisy of our legal system.
Hell, if churches had some balls to address issues the tax-exempt crap would be a moot point... but no, they have to cower and lick their master's hand, hoping that their chains will continue to rest so lightly.
What does article 1, section 8 say about fedgov's power in marriage or spouse visas?
Good question! I don’t have the answer. If there’s any good news here at least the court didn’t define or REdefine marriage and so for now it’s up to states to decide.
Probably just a matter of time.
Just what I was thinking.
Can anyone point to more than a scant couple of crucial ideological Constitutional/Conservative battles won during the last 25 years? IF that?
Let's face it; The Fix has been in. Corruption, Blackmail, Extortion, and Evil in High Places rule the Day. Get yourselves right with God and prepare to defend yourselves. All America is now The Alamo.
Samuel Alito replaced Miers, not Roberts, and Alito has been a great justice.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
A very dark day. Words cannot express the depth of my disgust and loathing for Roberts. I can only hope now for something (whatever it/they might be) that will bring this monstrous evil to an end.
If anyone wants on/off any of my pinglists, freepmail ME, not wagglebee; he hasn't been around for a while.
Imagine if this was the ruling on Brown VS Topeka?
Do you have a link to that ruling?
Honestly, I was fully expecting a sweeping ruling.
That only applies to conservatives...
Following the trend of the court system.... will that change when THEY become a minority?...nope.
I guess the claim is only the state of California can defend the law.
But, if one really believes in states rights as Roberts claims he does, Prop 8 should have been upheld no matter who challenged it.
“We can’t decide this so we will let the issue go that way by default” P*ssies in back dresses.
Just as predicted earlier this year.
And just in time for Gay Pride festivities this week.
Surprise surprise surprise.
They aren’t fooling anybody.
Sounds like the feds just told the states how they shall deal with the institution of marriage. You shouldn’t have asked for all those favors from uncle fedgov.
Boy I’m glad someone sees that. DOMA was idiotic because it has Federalized the issue. It should have just been left to the States.
Just so you know, the decision was 5-4 on this one, and Roberts was joined by Scalia, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kagan. Not exactly the normal split.
We’ve been that since Marbury v. Madison.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.