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.
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]
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.
Stupid humanity-—after multiple centuries of history here we are debating the definition of marriage.
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.
IMO, the issue of “gay marriage” should be left to the states. It’s NOT a federal issue and the bloated government of zero needs to get the heck out of it altogether.
Based on previous predictions of how the court would rule after oral arguments, we won’t know anything until CJ Roberts declares that Congress can allow anyone to get married as long as they are taxed accordingly!
I’m looking at this from a different angle...
Homosexuals have no right to be sheltered from the kind of screwing that I and millions of others have suffered from the “family courts.”
Seriously, you want to punish these people...? Demand they be exposed to the divorce industry. Alimony, community property, custody fights, child support, ruined credit rating...let them have it if they want it so damned bad. Trust me, it won’t be doing them any favors.
Statement by Slick Willie Clinton when he signed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996.
"Within the Roman Catholic Church, a marriage that has not yet been consummated, regardless of the reason for non-consummation, can be dissolved by the Pope. Additionally, an inability or an intentional refusal to consummate the marriage is probable grounds for an annulment. Catholic canon law defines a marriage as consummated when the "spouses have performed between themselves in a human fashion a conjugal act which is suitable in itself for the procreation of offspring, to which marriage is ordered by its nature and by which the spouses become one flesh." Thus some theologians, such as Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J., state that intercourse with contraception does not consummate a marriage." [Wikipedia]
Perhaps those of other religions could state their standards.
I say let the voters of each state determine this issue and keep SCOTUS out of this. It should be considered a state rights issue. If Kalifornika and Ass a chutesets want queer marriage, let them. Just don't force it on the states that don't want queer marriages.
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.