Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Not Overturn Obergefell?
American Greatness ^ | July 4, 2022 | Matthew Boose

Posted on 07/05/2022 7:17:00 AM PDT by redfog

Obergefell, like Roe, was a particularly arbitrary, extreme, and unjust imposition on the people. Like Roe, it had no basis in the Constitution’s text or American custom. It was simply dreamed up by a group of unelected judges who decided the time had come for them to impose a radically new understanding of the most fundamental institution of human society.

Like Roe, Obergefell took away from the people the power to decide the most basic moral questions and daily life in their communities. As Justice Scalia put it at the time, the Court was violating “a principle even more fundamental than no taxation without representation: no social transformation without representation.”

(Excerpt) Read more at amgreatness.com ...


TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: 2024election; constitution; dobbs; election2016; election2020; election2024; genderdysphoria; homosexualagenda; obergefell; roe; theconstitution
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-71 next last
Got my vote.
1 posted on 07/05/2022 7:17:00 AM PDT by redfog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: redfog

I would be amazed if the first Obergfell challenges are not filed before the end of the year.


2 posted on 07/05/2022 7:18:51 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redfog
"These include not just the “right” to an abortion, but the right of gay people to marry each other, invented by the Court seven summers ago in Obergefell v. Hodges."
Please include subject matter - not all of us know the legal case names.
3 posted on 07/05/2022 7:21:51 AM PDT by PIF (They came for me and mine ... now its your turn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redfog

The 4th-biggest overreach the court has ever made, so yeah, overturn it.


4 posted on 07/05/2022 7:22:27 AM PDT by Migraine ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

if i remember, “gay” marriage lost on every ballot it was ever on...even California by over a 2-1 margin. The SC was 5-4 on it...so basically, one un-elected judge, Anthony Kennedy, redefined marriage...that alone is galling.


5 posted on 07/05/2022 7:25:07 AM PDT by basalt ( in the irons....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: redfog

Why indeed!


6 posted on 07/05/2022 7:26:42 AM PDT by BlackAdderess (The abortion issue is a poison-pill that elites are using to destroy MAGA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redfog

One issue is who would have standing to challenge it?


7 posted on 07/05/2022 7:26:52 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redfog

If the decision on same sex marriage were overturned, then similar to abortion, the issue would go back to the states.

In the time from 2004 to about 2011, 32 states passed state constitutional amendments defining marriage as a man and a woman. All of those amendments, plus a number of regular statute laws defining marriage, were obliterated by the Supreme Court.

If same sex marriage were overturned, then the proponents of homosexual marriage would then make the case for that legal status, state by state. Some states would allow same sex marriage. Some would not.


8 posted on 07/05/2022 7:28:44 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: basalt
The supremes had gay clerks working for them and thought they were such nice hardworking boys that the country would be ready to accept Obergefell.

The rank and file gay mafia repaid their kindness by sending out a "couple" from Ohio to get married in a Kentucky county where they knew the clerk had moral objections to issuing such a license.

It's what they do.

9 posted on 07/05/2022 7:29:36 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (The politicized state destroys aspects of civil society, human kindness and private charity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: redfog

Marriage is a commitment in front of God, our family, and our community.

From the “state’s” perspective it is a property contract.

We could just drop the state’s aspect on it altogether and I would be fine. The commonwealth of MA has no place in my marital vows.


10 posted on 07/05/2022 7:30:36 AM PDT by Vermont Lt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: basalt

And Kennedy changed it not because of legal arguments but because he had a gay friend.


11 posted on 07/05/2022 7:31:20 AM PDT by oldbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

Because marriage, in the states view, is a property contract, there is a case to be made under to commerce clause and equal protection clauses.

It’s done and it ain’t going back.


12 posted on 07/05/2022 7:32:19 AM PDT by Vermont Lt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: circlecity
One issue is who would have standing to challenge it?

Any county clerk issuing marriage licenses.

13 posted on 07/05/2022 7:32:25 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: circlecity

“One issue is who would have standing to challenge it?”

How about any company forced to provide benefits for some employee’s “same sex spouse”? They have suffered actual damages due to the decision.


14 posted on 07/05/2022 7:37:10 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PIF

Thank you.


15 posted on 07/05/2022 7:39:01 AM PDT by OKSooner ("That was then, this is now." - S.E. Hinton, Tulsa, OK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: redfog

The principle of “ standing” comes to mind. Now, how is someone “ harmed materially iot claim standing?

I agree that I obergefel is bad stuff, but I think there are artificial hurdles in place to protect such heathenism from attack. Just like vote fraud- no one is harmed.....

Bletch, choke vomit....


16 posted on 07/05/2022 7:40:22 AM PDT by Manly Warrior (US ARMY (Ret), "No Free Lunches for the Dogs of War" )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt

“From the “state’s” perspective it is a property contract.”

No, it’s not a contract, because contracts must be legally enforceable, and contracts can’t be terminated unilaterally without cause unless that is specified in the contract itself.

Perhaps once upon a time marriage was close to a contract, but it isn’t anymore.


17 posted on 07/05/2022 7:44:06 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: All

Not only did they make up the right for “gay marriage” they made up the idea that such a thing is even exists.


18 posted on 07/05/2022 7:44:07 AM PDT by escapefromboston (Free Chauvin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Manly Warrior

Say you employee a gay man. He gets “married”. Now you must pay health benefits for his “husband”. You have been materially harmed by Obergefell.


19 posted on 07/05/2022 7:47:50 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: redfog

Hopefully each of these SC decisions drives progressives from red states to blue states for refuge. The sooner we separate, the better.


20 posted on 07/05/2022 7:48:58 AM PDT by chuckee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-71 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson