U.S. Supreme Court wipes out Proposition 8's gay marriage ban

MercuryNews.com ^ | June 26, 2013 | Howard Mintz

[momincombatboots]

I doubt I will live long enough to see that... that is a very long multi- generational process.

[Orangedog]

You might want to go look up hypocrisy because you are looking foolish.

I’m not advocating for the homosexuals and you know it.

[Ransomed]

Exactly. The left will never give up state involvement. The state needs to be involved so there is a way to punish and keep punishing those who won’t buy into whatever impossibility the state puts forth as marriage.

Freegards

[i_robot73]

LOL, kudos to you, sir, to point out the hypocrisy of those ‘in our own camp’.

[Williams]

Right, so look at the evil Jerry Brown did to the vote of his own people. One POS liberal pissed on his own citizens.

[1010RD]

We could lever this the opposite way as well. Simply allow federal benefits to construe to federal employees only. No spouse, children, etc.

Make it part of the undoing of Obamacare and toss in insurance portability and the Commerce Clause prohibition against state’s creating intrastate monopolies via licensing/permitting/zoning processes.

America is supposed to be a giant free trade zone. Why can’t you buy insurance nationally or use a doctor from any state you wish anywhere in the country, including your home state?

[rollo tomasi]

"Instead of fighting to get the feds out of something they have no business in."

How do you fight the 16th Amendment and the Social Security act? By voting for Libertarians? Yeah, that is a real effective tactic.

Tell me, how can one Court allow one particular definition of marriage (Read the Social Security Act please), then redefine that definition 70+ years later?

[McBuff]

Yeah, well you wanted your “living, breathing document” to give power to Mordor on the Potomac that wasn’t spelled out in article 1, section

You misunderstood what I said. . .hell, I was agreeing with you. . and I was also just indicating that children are hurt the most by today's ruling, that's all. . .you're angry, I'm angry.. .I sure as hell don't subscribe to the "living and breathing" crap. . .so why don't you point that thing at the real enemy, Mr. Ready-Fire-Aim guy!!

[1010RD]

Excellent question. How can an animal, plant or the environment in general have ‘standing’? The greenies don’t have standing either in their cases and never have.

I’d like to see more on this. It might be a reverse Pandora’s box.

[rollo tomasi]

Do you actually favor expanding the Feds definition of “marriage”? You are the hypocrite or closet pervert. DOMA was a firewall of law in which the Federal government already established the recognition of matrimony through various laws and the 16th via the powers granted to Congress (Tax code). DOMA just protected that definition, not created the Feds recognition of matrimony. The reality of a Constitution on life-support was shattered during the Progressive Era. Now we have mob rule and expansions favored by convoluted libertarians.

[VRWC For Truth]

From the perspective of three branches of gov’t, the SC, the judicial, has sided with the executive branch over the legislative branch aka the people. The peoples check and balance on the executive branch is the ballot box, or IMPEACHMENT. The people’s check on the judicial system is only IMPEACHMENT. The Robert’s court ganging up with the executive branch is a shame. We, the people, need to take our power back.

[liberalh8ter]

Amen. It's an insult to virtuous Catholics that Pelosi’s proclamations are allowed to stand unchallenged, by the Vatican.

[Almondjoy]

I agree, I most concerned with the fact that if a State’s AG and governor do not sign on to what the people wanted that it’s impossible to overturn a federal ruling on the case. That seems awfully heavy handed for the people who say they want to protect the people from oppressive governments.

[Forward the Light Brigade]

Think of the Gold Rush for Laywers handling Gay Divorces? Next big thing Poligamy and sharia child marriages for girls as young as five.

[rollo tomasi]

Yes you are. What exactly did this ruling achieve? The Feds still recognizes marriage to you all short-sighted libertarians; now the homosexuals get in on the benefits/action. How is this not favoring the homosexual agenda or pushing homosexual marriage or ending Fed observance on marriage?

[JCBreckenridge]

Nobody’s gonna call out the liberalterians for once again screwing america.

[USS Johnston]

Ibelieve a storm is coming sooner rather than later and pray we and ours are prepared for it.

Yup. The calm before The Storm.

Amen on that prep, brutha.

[Ray76]

Hey no thinking “outside the box”! /s

[rintense]

IOW, screw the will of the people.

[Rokurota]

Has Scalia gone full blown lib, too? Scalia voted the same as roberts on both gay marriage cases.