Posted on 03/27/2013 10:31:59 AM PDT by C19fan
If the Supreme Court can find its way through a dense procedural thicket, and confront the constitutionality of the federal law that defined marriage as limited to a man and a woman, that law may be gone, after a seventeen-year existence. That was the overriding impression after just under two hours of argument Wednesday on the fate of the Defense of Marriage Act.
(Excerpt) Read more at scotusblog.com ...
I think the best case is ruling DOMA unconstitutional, and clearly stating that the Federal Government has no business defining marriage at all. Leave the matter to the states.
If they rule that the Federal Government has no role in defining marriage, it is left to the States, and if so, to be consistent, than Proposition 8 should be allowed to stand.
Exactly what occurred to me 5 minutes ago. You can’t tell the states to decide the issue and then tell them that their decision on the issue is unconstitutional.
me: Marriage is between a man and a woman and is very powerful.
Are your parents gay?
Gay Person: No my parents are not gay.
me: There you go!
[def. of parent: " one who begets or brings forth offspring =Webster, 1887]
Back when the Court first granted certiorari in these two cases, my prediction was that there would be (1) a 5-4 ruling in the Prop. 8 case that the Constitution doesn't require same-sex marriage, and (2) a 5-4 ruling in the DOMA case that the federal government must recognize any same-sex marriage which is legal in the state where it took place, with Kennedy in the majority in both cases.
I think the court will ultimately rule along the lines of what Michael McConnell recommended in his WSJ article.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324281004578354300151597848.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Words have meaning not because of “laws”.
Or flash-in-the-pan court decisions.
Words have meaning because of common usage.
I very much doubt the people will ever believe/accept that “marriage” is anything other than one man united with one woman.
That's what I thought, but after the Robert's, pretzel bending, decision for the Affordable Care Act anything is possible with this crew.
no because now homsexual immigration becomes federal.
as does polygamy immigration.
you go to no borders because of marriage.
Stupid humanity-—after multiple centuries of history here we are debating the definition of marriage.
That’s true. I have argued enough appeals (none before SCOTUS, but before lower federal and state appellate courts) to know that you can’t predict a result based on the questioning.
Precisely. It ain’t over ‘till the fat lady sings!
DOMA was a mccain manuver to stop a federal marriage amendment.
Now we should vote the federal marriage amendment.
period.
The interesting thing was, listening to Rush... He was describing Sotomayor’s questioning of Ted Olson, as to where one can draw a line as to who marries who...
Polygamists are OK?
I dunno, with ACA Roberts & co seemed to attack the case publicly at first, then look what happened.
That would take many years... by then, marrying animals will be legal.
Sadly, my prediction is the SCOTUS will vote 6-3 in favor of scrapping all traditional marriage laws. Roberts and Kennedy will side with the majority.
with a will, it would take less than six months and NOT require der leaders signature.
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.