Same sex couples’ Supreme Court victory

June 26, 2013

gay2The Supreme Court came out in favor of gay marriage by voting to overturn a key part of the Defense of Marriage Act and letting stand a lower court ruling overturning California’s Proposition 8. [ChicagoTribune]

“The principal purpose and the necessary effect of this law are to demean those persons who are in a lawful same-sex marriage,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote in a 5-4 decision on Defense of Marriage Act. “This requires the Court to hold, as it now does, that Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the liberty of the person protected by the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.”

The Defense of Marriage Act defined marriage, for federal purposes, as a relationship between a man and a woman.

In addition, the court voted 5-4 that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the Prop 8 case, leaving in place a San Francisco federal district court ruling that overturned the law that banned same sex marriages.

“The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the state, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity,” Kennedy wrote.

 


Loading...
Slowerfaster

I still want to know where Cain’s wife came from.


GalaxyTraveler

Kennedy’s opinion makes sense. We live under the US Constitution, not the Bible.


kettle

Shocking I know, but I agree with GalaxyTraveler.


Rambunctious

YAWN…


Ted Slanders

Rambunctious,


Agreed, your posts are some of the most boring here on CCN. Whenever Jesus won’t let me sleep, I reread your posts, and their inane content is better than ANY sleeping aide available to get to sleep FAST!


Thank you.


Rambunctious

Thanks Ted every time you “reread” my post I get royalties…


kettle

Rambunctious next time don’t bother.


We care that much.


Rambunctious

YAWN…again…


shelworth

They got it wrong, what they should have said was it is unconstitutional to give any government benefits based on if you are married or not. Nor should you get any tax deductions for having children. Base everything on the individual.


r0y

That is the common sense approach. We’re talking about government. Even the SCOTUS are just a bunch of “what can I get out of it” people who have lived and leeched off the system for years. Why should we expect good governance? Why are we constantly (and I mean constantly) disappointed at most every action and decision government takes? Does that not say something about us?


Ted Slanders

For the most part, the pseudo-christians got their reasoning to be against DOMA from their many different and contradicting Judeo-Christian bibles, the pulpits, and Faux News. DOMA has now been struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court. Facetiously, the question now is, will the pseudo-christian community act in accordance to their initiating another killing Inquisition or Crusade, this time, against the ungodly homosexual as supported throughout the bible?


For the pseudo-christian insane of Christianity, unfortunately they can get the authority to agree with the Hebrew-Christian God by direct COMMANDS that the homosexual should be put to death. This is done by reading the passages shown herewith, and without any convenient apologetic spin-doctoring needed whatsoever. (Leviticus 20:13, Romans 1:18-32, Genesis 19:24-25)


Far be it from me to promote this insidious godly action stated above! But, in fact, the Hebrew-Christian God does promote the outright death to the homosexual as explicitly shown in the passages listed above. Does the pseudo-christian become a hypocrite if they don’t agree with the God they worship in promoting the death of the homosexual? The Catch-22 is; “And hereby we do know that we know him, we keep his commandments” (1 John 2:3) Keep his “death to homosexuals” commands? Really?


As if the horrific biblical commands of putting to death the homosexual isn’t enough, they are also NOT to be allowed in church! How many pseudo-christians do you know that don’t’ follow this other godly command against the homosexual?


“There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, NOR A SODOMITE of the sons of Israel Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a dog, into the house of the Lord thy God for any vow: for even both these are abomination unto the Lord thy God.” (Deut 23:17-18)


Pseudo-christians, understand a very simple concept, you got your hatred and bigotry towards the homosexual mostly from the Old Testament of the bible, of which ironically, you say isn’t relative anymore, that is, unless you conveniently need it again to promote your agenda against DOMA. Can you spell H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E-S? Sure you can.


Pseudo-christians, always remember; “EVERY WORD OF GOD IS PURE: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. “ (Proverbs 30:5-6) That “EVERY WORD” connotation includes the despicable laws and commands promoting the death of the homosexual within the Old Testament, along with the New Testament as well in Romans 1:18-32.


On the whole, Christianity is a primitive, sickening and horrid belief system that unfortunatley has carried over into the 21st century, and is equal to Islam and Judaism in its bigotry, racism and killing ways against humankind.


ironyman2000

What’s a “pseudo-christian”? Seems to me the pseudos and authenticos both believe in some version

of some bogus book which is nothing but consistent in being inconsistent.


The bottom line is that any two or group people have the same constitutional as any others and that

it is none of any other’s gdamned business.


Kudos to SCOTUS


ironyman2000

constitutional rights that is


SLOTECH90

Glad to see the Court got it RIGHT! Now, if all you alarmists and prophets of doom will lose your fallacious false dichotomy, slippery slope and ad hominem arguments along with the quotations from the Mesopotamiam myth book, mind your own damn business and try and get along with your fellow sentient species members, this too shall pass just like women getting the vote, slavery, and blacks in baseball.


Citizen

Why can’t you just be pleased with the court decision? I guess you won’t be satisfied until every person who doesn’t support gay marriage is in jail.


Ted Slanders

Citizen,


The irony is that the religious right would like everyone to be in jail that promoted DOMA if they could, in the name of God, of course!


Maxfusion

Do you think there’s an end to this? This was never about marriage, it’s about control, power, and punishing what you think and believe(attacking religion). Read the comments nationwide, and almost all attack Christians. Never Muslims mind you, always Christians. More of the “social justice” nonsense. Why is it nonsense, because it’s too subjective. Whose “social justice’? Adolf Hitler’s or Iran today, and like “climate change”, you get to make it up as you go (false flag). Yes climate change, because it’s a different side of the same coin. It’s not about”saving the planet”, it’s about modifying the way you conduct your life to fit another’s narrative (primarily driven by envy). There’s another “issue” just around the corner, take it to the bank.


kettle

Maxfusion says:”and almost all attack Christians. Never Muslims mind you, always Christians. ”


It will stop when the so called christians start to mind there own business.


Talk about confused….


Slowerfaster

You forgot “evolution is a ponzi scheme”, “low-flow toilets are a job killer”, and “flouride in the water robs us of our precious bodily fluids”.


Stunned

Ah yes, now we hear from the “can’t you just be nice to homosexuals” crowd!


Jorge Estrada

Women getting to vote, slavery and blacks in baseball? What does that have to do with “The Last March of the Penguins” as promoted by our Supreme Court?


The next Supreme Court decission may outlaw your right to disagree and formally label all who do, Homophobics or Heterofanatics.


r0y

We have slavery in baseball? Oh my…


slojustice

I predict in thirty years, marriage of any kind will be considered passé and our society will pay the price.


kettle

Pay the price? Nonsense.


We already have our freedom.


Slowerfaster

With a 50% divorce rate, serial ( i.e. multiple – one at a time ) marriages, and most heterosexual relationships never even bothering with marriage, I don’t need to predict.


Marriage has been passe for decades.


If it weren’t for the elaborate ceremonies thrown by the gay community; wedding planners, photographers, and florists would all be dead professions.


r0y

Actually, that is the progressive left’s real agenda with this. The complete and total abolishment of the family structure, and you start that process with the destruction of marriage. The destruction of marriage was started by a re-defining process (as is most everything progressive: change the definition to soften us up). They are very consistent in their theories, which is why history is never taught anymore; we’d all see the patterns over and over. To each their own, according to their own ability (and all that nonsense). The failure of Jamestown (c. 1607) all over again.


Slowerfaster

Really ?


Staying on topic, I think that what history shows …and what most sane people believe in; is that couples will continue to fall in love, and will proceed to make promises for a life-long committment to each other

Love will triumph, and no amount of cynicism, fear, or suasion from any political agenda will change that.


Black_Copter_Pilot

“This requires the Court to hold, as it now does, that Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the liberty of the person protected by the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.”


And this paves the way for polygamy, multiple couples marriage and anything else one can conger up. One’s pursuit of happiness can be as different as an individual’s DNA.


This may be legally correct, but opens a huge can of worms


zaphod

and anything else one can conger up.


Sarah Bellum

Unless and until the state recognizes marriage to multiple partners, close relatives, children, animals, inanimate objects, and fictional characters, you’ve got nothing to worry about.


Slowerfaster

What part of “equal protection under the law” don’t you understand ?


Incidentally, the examples you cite are all red-herrings.


Rawhide

Genesis 2:18, 20b-24

The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” …But for Adam no suitable helper was found. So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and closed up the place with flesh. Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.


The man said,

“This is now bone of my bones

and flesh of my flesh;

she shall be called ‘woman,’

for she was taken out of man.”


For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. (NIV)


Theo P. Neustic

24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.


26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.


28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality,[c] wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving,[d] unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.


robert a

Your 2000 year old Operating Manual needs updating.


kayaknut

Yes, lets do away with the ten commandments, that whole honor thing is so passed, and lets just drop the killling part, and thanks to a certain recent president adultery is okay so that one is already gone, the big banks have ended any problem with stealing thanks in part to our government so no problem there.


kettle

Your commandments only apply to your congregation and so on.


The rest of us are just fine doing the right thing without the threats.


Theo P. Neustic

You’ll be given an opportunity to tell that to the author.


kettle

Only in your dreams.


Ted Slanders

robert a,


Pick your version of the MANY contradicting bibles, but they cannot be updated, as much as the pseudo-christians try in vain to do at times, because God’s direct word says that they can’t!


“The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in the furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.” (Psalm 12:6-7)


And, if any pseudo-christian has the nerve to use apologetics to try to change or add too the bible, well, it’s curtains for them, praise!


“For I testify unto everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book, if anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; And if anyone takes away from the words of this book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, and from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” (Revelation 22:18-19)


zaphod
Stunned

Rawhide….you covered it thanks. Answering any of these negative haters with like comments makes me wrong and you’ve straightened me out! Blessings!!