Same-sex marriage rights are sweeping the US. Here's where each state stands.

Vox ^ | November 20, 2014 | German Lopez

[Genoa]

Most of the SEC still prefers heterosexuality.

[cripplecreek]

Sweeping the courtrooms.

[Last Dakotan]

Sweeping apparently means imposed by unelected judicial overloads.

[lightman]

[Blood of Tyrants]

Most of the country does, too. It is the tyrants in black robes who prefer homosexuality.

[Iron Munro]

The USA has become more arrogant, detestable, perverted and morally bankrupt than Sodom and Gomorrah ever were.

[EternalVigilance]

Judicial tyranny, unchecked, unbalanced by officers of the other branches.

It’s a rebellion against God and nature, and a coup d’etat against the people of the United States.

[cripplecreek]

Yep. I don’t think a single state has voted to legalize with a ballot proposal.

[defconw]

I don’t think so either. Even Minnesota voted to ban it, but the liberals don’t care what the people think, they go to court and put it in front of one of their judges and there you go. That’s what happened to Indiana.

[cripplecreek]

I think the Massachusetts legislature voted to legalize but that’s as close as any state has come to a popular vote on the issue.

[defconw]

I'm in South Dakota now, but a few years back, we the people voted to ban it in Minnesota. I see it's legal there now. It's a shame really. I think the country is just about lost. That's what happens when dumb people vote in despots.

[Ransomed]

I think there were a few, maybe a couple more that rejected a popular vote marriage amendment. I think Maryland is one of those approved it by a ballot.

FReegards

[PGR88]

As far as I can see, every single move towards same-sex marriage has been due to COURTS.

Sorry to say it, but reform seems impossible. We need a major financial and dollar collapse, to stop the fiat money printing, debt-issuing, interest-rate-controlling-Fed from supporting Progressive, centrally-planned government. Maybe we can rebuild from there. I don’t know.

I see no other way

[cuban leaf]

When brought to a vote of the people, they were eliminated at every turn.

But a few judges feel differently, apparently.

[RckyRaCoCo]

I don't think the Founders ever envisioned a handful of hand-picked federal judges over-turning the will of millions of people that voted for traditional marriage.

(Prop 187 in CA. was yet another in a long line of test cases on judicial activism vs. the will of the people, the Feds killed it, the people capitulated to the power of their overlords, and it simply died on the vine)

Even the most flaming progressive probably can't believe they are getting away with it...and(more importantly)it gives them the incentive to see what else they can "fundamentally transform"...in the face of what has become a feckless/weak opposition.

[Ransomed]

‘...Maryland is one of those approved it by a ballot.’

Maine and Washington are the other two.

[Timber Rattler]

Not by law and the will of the people, but dictatorial judicial fiat.

[capydick]

What I don't understand is - in most of these States, same sex marriage was prohibited via the ballot box, which was subsequently overturned by legal challenges each and every time.

Marijuana legalization was also legalized via slim majorities at the ballot box yet - I havent heard of one legal challenge to the initiative and it's implementation.

Why is it that each and every same sex marriage initiative was challenged and over turned and not one legalized marijuana initiative?

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

We need a Federal Marriage Amendment to stop judges from legislating.