Funny. My read of the decisions indicate that the USSC has ruled that the feds have no authority over the states regarding marriage, that the states can define marriage. That means that the 32 states that have defined marriage in traditional biblical terms can NOT be struck down and do NOT need to recognize same sex marriages from other states. While this looks like a loss I see a possible hidden win for us in these rulings.
But, I think the ruling applies to federal law. So, while the marriage is not recognized in a particular state, it is recognized federally, which affects filing states on tax returns, for instance. SO, the question seems to be, are married gay people in such states filing as “married” on the federal returns but as “single” on their state returns? Won’t be a problem in TX or FL, where there is no state income tax, but elsewhere it should create a lot of headaches for accountants!
Yeah, and what are the odds that the supremes are gonna shut down gay marriage when the bill passes in congress.
You wanna wager on that one?
Basically - you hate Christianity more than you love freedom.
Which means that a [normally unnecessary] constitutional amendment "defining" marriage as one-man-one-woman should have passed easily and fast 10-15 years ago, if conservatives could see that far ahead. Conservatives now would need 6 more states to ratify the amendment - some possibly where the people were denied by legislature to vote on the issue, by hook or by crook.
While conservatives / Republicans dithered, liberals were acting. Which is why they rushed to get as many states as they could to legalize homosexual marriage.
And "traditional" is probably not the right word to use in regards to marriage. Marriage has little to nothing to do with "tradition" - it has to do with the Natural Law. So the word "natural" is much more accurate and appropriate with regards to marriage, than "traditional" and "non-traditional."