Skip to main content

Trend lines for polling on approval of marriage equality.
Whatever the Supreme Court decides, the momentum is clearly in the right direction.
The Supreme Court begins hearing oral arguments on California's Prop 8 and the federal Defense of Marriage Act Tuesday, a moment that can't come soon enough for people who've been waiting and fighting for years or even decades to have their relationships recognized equally under the law (or for those who've been sleeping on the sidewalks for a chance to be spectators in the court). This much-anticipated moment brings a whole lot of questions to be followed by another seemingly endless wait, likely until June (remember waiting for the Obamacare decision?), and the tea leaf-reading of the justices' questions will be intense.

Assuming the court finds that the supporters of Prop 8 have the standing to defend the measure, four outcomes are seen as possible for Prop 8 and marriage equality: the court could uphold Prop 8, a straightforward defeat that would leave marriage equality to be fought state by state; it could allowed marriage equality in California but not elsewhere under the logic that "states can’t strip gays of the opportunity to marry once they possess the right, as they did in California for the five months before Proposition 8 was approved"; it could grant marriage equality in states that have allowed civil unions, as the Obama administration argued in its amicus brief and as Adam B has argued is a likely outcome to the case; or it could simply say marriage equality is a constitutional right. The question on DOMA is more of an up or down: constitutional or not.

Many eyes will obviously be on Justice Anthony Kennedy, a frequent swing vote, but he's not the only justice people are wondering about:

For those reading tea leaves, there are signs [Chief Justice John] Roberts could be in play. While in private practice in 1995, Roberts gave pro bono help to the legal team preparing briefs and oral arguments for the Colorado case. And Roberts is using some of his personal allotment of tickets to this week’s arguments to allow one of his cousins who’s a lesbian and her partner to attend oral arguments, the Los Angeles Times reported. [...]

There is one potential wild card on the left: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Though she was a pioneering litigator for the American Civil Liberties Union on gender issues, she has repeatedly said she thinks the Roe v. Wade decision went too far because it forced a consensus that many Americans had not arrived at and led to a backlash.

Another question mark, of course, will be what wildly offensive things Justice Antonin Scalia says during oral arguments.

A decision for Prop 8 or for DOMA would obviously be a letdown and a setback for the cause of equality. But while it might reinvigorate the bigots in their flagging fight to keep people from marrying, such a decision wouldn't stop the fight for justice and would come in the face of polling showing increasing majorities in support of marriage equality. Fighting it out state by state would be grueling and there would be too many injustices along the way, but the eventual winner is clear.

Originally posted to Laura Clawson on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 07:09 AM PDT.

Also republished by Milk Men And Women and Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Here's hoping! (9+ / 0-)

    I'm a bit nauseous  this morning worrying about oral arguments.  I can't wait to get home to listen to them -- they will be posted online early this afternoon.  

    So my hope is resting on today's decision.  So much fighting could be stopped ...  the war far equality will never completely end, but this could be the last major battle today. Or, it could be the signal for another 40 skirmishes to be fought and won.

    Minority rights should never be subject to majority vote.

    by lostboyjim on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 07:20:25 AM PDT

  •  I know we won't know for months... (5+ / 0-)

    but I'm so anxious today... more than I had imagined I would be.  I can't imagine how I'll feel tomorrow!

    I so want to come home.  8 years in exile under DOMA is too long!

    "As for butter versus margarine, I trust cows more than chemists. " Joan Gussow http://paleoplayground.com

    by bogbud on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 07:30:19 AM PDT

  •  They are playing the rally (4+ / 0-)

    outside the Supreme Court here for those interested in listening:
    http://www.cnn.com/...

    Organizing is what you do before you do something, so that when you do it, it is not all mixed up. A. A. Milne

    by hulibow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 07:30:33 AM PDT

  •  Tea-leaf reading? (8+ / 0-)

    Umm, us civilized people sacrifice goats and burn the entrails to please the gods Athena and Ares to grant us the wisdom to make our Supreme Court predictions.  

    sigh...  Damn barbarians...

    The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing online commenters that they have anything to say.-- B.F.

    by lcj98 on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 07:32:27 AM PDT

  •  I read this today on a message board: (19+ / 0-)

    I think we should amend the Constitution so that marriage is required to be based on Biblical principles, as follows:

    Marriage in the United States shall consist of a union between one man and one or more women. (Gen 29:17-28; II Sam 3:2-5; Matthew 25:1)
    Marriage shall not impede a man's right to take concubines in addition to his wife or wives. (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron11:21)
    A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed. (Deut 22:13-21)
    Marriage of a believer and a non-believer shall be forbidden. (Gen 24:3; Num 25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh 10:30)
    Since marriage is for life, neither this Constitution nor the constitution of any state, nor any state or federal law, shall be construed to permit divorce. (Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9)
    If a married man dies without children, his brother shall marry the widow. If he refuses to marry his brother's widow or deliberately does not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one shoe and be otherwise punished in a manner to be determined by law. (Gen. 38:6-10; Deut 25:5-10)
    In lieu of marriage, if there are no acceptable men in your town, it is required that you get your dad drunk and have sex with him (even if he had previously offered you up as a sex toy to men young and old), tag-teaming with any sisters you may have. Of course, this rule applies only if you are female. (Gen 19:31-36)

    •  I'm just wondering why would gays or ... (1+ / 2-)
      Recommended by:
      terrypinder
      Hidden by:
      bluegrass50, Lost and Found

      homosexuals want to be justified under what the bible says since they are so dismissive of God and the other commandment other than marriage...  seems hypocritical to me...

      why not just go to the core of it the legal process and leave marriage out of it...  why imitate christians?

      I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

      by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 07:58:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Christians don't hold the patent (12+ / 0-)

        ...on marriage.  They never did.  "Prior art," you know.

        America, we can do better than this...

        by Randomfactor on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:03:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  That is not what I said (0+ / 0-)

          I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

          by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:04:36 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  who can stop anyone from doing anything... (0+ / 0-)

            go to the crux benefits in law

            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

            by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:05:43 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I don't have a problem with gays... (0+ / 0-)

              have friends and relatives...  but give me the freedom to have my opinion as you expect me to respect yours... respect is a two way street

              I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

              by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:07:45 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Want to know why? (12+ / 0-)

                Let's start with the US tax code, inheritance laws, community property, hospital visitation rules, parental rights and responsibilities....

                that's why.

                It's turtles all the way down

                by mdcalifornia on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:28:37 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Then that ought to be where you aim at... (0+ / 0-)

                  I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                  by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:41:08 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                    •  It appears meknow (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Gooserock, Lost and Found

                      doesn't know.

                      •  I want to know... (0+ / 0-)

                        should be easy you work with one every day... come on  tell me

                        I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                        by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:08:44 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Here's how it works. This is very, very easy. (6+ / 0-)

                          Marriage Equality is about Fairness.

                          Let's take Newt Gingrich. He can walk into any courthouse in this  country and get married. He's done so on three seperate occasions.

                          And his marriages are recognized everywhere in the country.

                          Not so for me.

                          There are only a handful of states where I can do that. And in the rest of the states? My marriage would not be recognized one bit. There are over 1,000 rights that are conferred with that legal document. Even if I was able to obtain them through expensive legal action, they would stop at the border of my state. Hell, my state probably wouldn't even recognize many of them anyway.

                          Oh it gets better. I know a couple who has been together almost 40 years. They had 3 children. Under the laws of the state they lived in most of that time, they're married. There's NO piece of paper that says so. And that marriage is RECOGNIZED pretty much everywhere, despite no wedding, no marriage license, no anything. The difference between them and me? They are heterosexual.

                          IT. IS. NOT. FAIR. END. OF. STORY. PERIOD.

                          This is not about your religious argument, and quite frankly, I kind of don't care about your religious argument. I'm not Christian, like at least 60 million other Americans, and being forced to live by your interpretation of the rules is wrong, and quite frankly, a violation of my rights.

                          I don't care what's sacred to you. This is about fairness. No compromise. At all.

                          When it comes down, that piece of paper I get from my local courthouse better say marriage on it like all the straight people. Simple as that. That's what Marriage Equality is about.

                          •  Good... (0+ / 0-)

                            This is a choice you made in the face of what was or is legal...  your decision to kick against the prick...  then go for it...  i am of a group who had to fight for my rights...  

                            i have an opinion based on what ever...  you have an opinion based on what ever...  there lies the problem...  you are before the highest court in the US... you are having your day...  because i am not caving in to your opinion and cause because I do not agree with it don't sentence me to the wall.  I am not in your face with anything.  I am just dialoguing with you.is that okay?  or do you want to deny me more than my right of opinion and sacred belief?

                            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                            by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:25:21 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  what choice? (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Gooserock

                            I've made no choice in how I was born, if that's what you're getting at.

                          •  I can't argue with what you believe of yourself... (0+ / 0-)

                            I was speaking choices in general but it covers everything...  if you have drank yellow all your life, the next time you go to by one and there is a variety or just one more, you have a choice.  you may be narrow minded and have never put yellow under the microscope of truth (another choice by the way)...  

                            there are a lot of reasons we choose the things we do...

                            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                            by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 12:27:12 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  sure. I choose to live in a small town. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            DSPS owl

                            I choose to garden. I choose to eat meat. I choose not to eat wild-caught fish when I can.

                            I choose to read science fiction. I choose to write science fiction and fact.

                            I did not choose my sexual orientation one single bit. it's as unchangeable as my skin color. It was not a choice at all.

                            (I DID choose to ignore the Focus on the Family book a relative bought me as a teenager. I chose to shred it and I chose to flush the remains down the toilet. THAT was a choice.)

                          •  terry... (0+ / 0-)

                            When I was in my mid 20s I had a cocaine habit (early 70s).  I had the connections, the money to buy it withour a problem.  One day my wife looked me in the eyes and said I was hooked.  That I was addicted.  That meant I did not have a choice I thought.  

                            at first I laughed it off.  But the more I thought about it the more it bothered me that I was controlled by something outside of me.  I enjoyed what coke did for me but my wife gave me a taste of the truth and I found the rest of it.

                            From that day some where around Feb., 1973 I decided to never again allow anything to control me.  Marriage, jobs, money, other people, I defend my choice.  I am very contemplative.  Not good at it but I like to do it.  I look at the issue from every side I can.  

                            Lots of times things that are good for me are not comfortable and manytimes what bad for me feels, tastes and looks really appealing even smells good...

                            You have a choice, you choose not to exercise it for some reason...  For my choice I will even choose death (BUT NEVER AT MY OWN HANDS)...  

                            I refused to be boxed in, but I respect the truth...  and I know that there is a inevidable truth that stands above every things else in that file...

                            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                            by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 12:50:54 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  your addiction is irrelevant to the way I was born (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            bluegrass50, edwardssl

                            end of story. I am glad you beat it.

                      •  Im waiting... i like the term... (0+ / 0-)

                        just have not heard it much... want to know how one behaves that inspires another to testify of them

                        I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                        by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:13:58 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  If your comment made any sense at all, (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          zinger99, Mike Kahlow

                          I'd answer it.

                          The comment above in this thread refers to

                          Let's start with the US tax code, inheritance laws, community property, hospital visitation rules, parental rights and responsibilities....
                          that's where this argument before the supreme court is being aimed.

                          It's not being aimed at religious institutions.

                          •  okay (0+ / 0-)

                            then being the most passionate christian you know is not relavent...  i get it...  a lot of things don't make sense to you...  it is a wonder that some of us can communicate at all...  

                            who said it was aimed at religious institutions?  I didn't but to be honest it does have implications...  just as homosexuals are ostracized in this country so are christians by many groups today.

                            granted so called christians like westboro don't help...

                            but as passionate as you are for this issue so am I and my sacred beliefs...  

                            fact is they conflict...  do we discuss them or just fall into factions?  i believe every one should have equal protection in the basic needs of humans under the law.  should same sexes be able to marry...i know they should not...  do they have the right... heck yeah, I can not stop you...  

                            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                            by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:51:27 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  First, the comment I made (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zinger99

                            about the individual I work with is in another thread.  If you would restrict your comments to the correct thread, then your comments might make more "sense".

                            Second, you can hold whatever personal beliefs you wish.  I truly couldn't care less.

                            What I do care about is when the state codifies personal beliefs into law which restrict the civil rights of others.

                          •  Not caring about the personal beliefs of others is (0+ / 0-)

                            a bit of the troubles we face in this and other matters.  Im not going anywhere and I don't suspect you and your bunch are.  Not caring about how each other feels will bring consequences.  

                            you think not...

                            as they say on the Island...Respect...  I give it and expect it...

                            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                            by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:42:48 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Respect (0+ / 0-)
                            I'm just wondering why would gays or homosexuals want to be justified under what the bible says since they are so dismissive of God and the other commandment other than marriage...  seems hypocritical to me...
                            is not what you gave.

                            Also, I am not a "bunch".

                            You appear not to know the meaning of the word "respect".

                          •  because i gave an opinion that did not agree with (0+ / 0-)

                            yours i did not respect you...  so respect would be to lie to you and tell you i think it is okay... that would be fear, intimidation or out right lying...

                            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                            by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:30:42 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You showed disrespect in your very first comment (0+ / 0-)

                            right off the bat by calling people hypocrites, which everyone can see.  It had nothing to do with your opinion, so stop trying to play the poor little victim.  You had the opportunity to state your opinion respectfully, and you utterly failed to do it.

                            You deserved whatever push back from everyone that you got.

                          •  Where did I call you a hypocrit...? (0+ / 0-)

                            Puss back is love to me Edwardssl...  I am sure I did not call you that but I will call you super sensitive...  what is up with that man...  

                            Do you know who and what you are (i mean being a hypocrit or not)...  name calling does not shake a confident man.  

                            I can promise you that I will avoid commenting on your comments because there is too much drama.  I personally welcome opposition to my views.  Good constructive criticism.  I learn of my opponents or enemies by it.  

                            An old saying you may do well to learn..."Iron sharpeneth Iron"  Don't be afraid of opposition.  If you are right and the truth is in your theme you have nothing to worry about but if you are depending on semantics or cleverness you will be in hot water or deep do do...

                            try to loosen up and calm down and know your angle Ed...

                            I mean you no harm...  If I am wrong prove me so...  I try to avoid pissing contests with people who are paranoid or what ever but sometimes my human side wakes up strong and I get drawn in.  

                            What I said from the beginning is that you have the right to do what ever you want to do.  God allows it how can I stop you.  But at the same time I will give my opinion.  I am a member of kos, I am respective of the rules and regulations and will abide by them.  

                            But I will give you this, on any thread you are on if you do not want me to participate then message me and I will do it for you.  There are enough threads on here for the both of us.  

                            I just kind of thought that people came here for dialogue and not to be coddled and po po'ed

                            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                            by meknow on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 10:46:58 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  {{{rolls eyes}}} (0+ / 0-)

                            Have a nice day.

                          •  hahahahahaahha...i will for sure... hehehe (0+ / 0-)

                            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                            by meknow on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 10:59:37 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No, I don't think you're passionate (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            terrypinder, edwardssl

                            You are doing a very nice job at posting similar things in several comments. But what you're not doing is facing the hard questions. Questions about what it means to hold an idea sacred, or what it means to coexist with people of a different faith.

                            In particular, at least from my point of view, you're not responding to me. And I'm asking you those kinds of questions. With, if I do say so myself, passion.

                            I'd like to see your response to this.
                            Or this.

                            Or, most especially, this.

                            Being passionate about your beliefs takes more than just yelling them very loudly. I won't hold my breath for those responses.

                            "All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -Douglas Adams

                            by Serpents Choice on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 10:16:39 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I assume this is for me although I never said that (0+ / 0-)

                            I was compassionate.  That was a fellow that told me that they had an employee that was the most compassionate christian they knew.  I asked to explain what a compassionate christian is...

                            I will read your matters and give comment...

                            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                            by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:45:52 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I said passionate, not compassionate. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            edwardssl

                            Your argument through this entire thread has been to say that you would wish that others not be granted the ability to marry freely the people they love, solely because your faith would not hold such a union sacred.

                            Believe me, I never mistook that argument for a compassionate one.

                            "All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -Douglas Adams

                            by Serpents Choice on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 12:34:44 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  show me a post where I said that... (0+ / 0-)

                            what i said is that you have the right to do as you please but I do not think it kosher...  why do you put words in my mouth...  is it a habit?

                            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                            by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:18:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Here you go (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            terrypinder, edwardssl, bluegrass50

                            Of course, you pretty much never say what you're talking about directly.  Your posts are full of this sort of florid dancing around your point.  It's not a novel tactic to me. You want to be able to turn around and say "I didn't say that!" when someone draws the conclusions you want them to draw.

                            then why does it matter that it be marriage which gets your panties in a was with the right wing...  just call it what you want and fight for the taxes and what ever else
                            Followed shortly by:
                            I am a Christian...  but I can't stop you from doing anything... if God gives you that right how can I stop you...  but I have the right to oppose what I think is not healthy or right as do you...  i give that right to you...  why do you go right wing on m
                            Now, you can pretend that you meant something else, but -- to the extent that your words are ever clear -- they were clear here.  You do not want gays to have "marriage".  You don't care about tax filings or the like, but you've got a problem with the word.  And then, pressed on the issue, you "have the right to oppose" it.

                            You do have that right. It is an opinion, and everyone is allowed those. If you're going to engage in argument with others based on that opinion, though, you'd better be willing to explain it and to justify it.

                            If you think I'm misquoting you, or that everyone else here is attributing opinions to you that you don't hold, that's very easy to fix.  You are free to clarify your stance: what is wrong with same-sex marriage that caused you to jump into these comments in the first place?

                            "All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -Douglas Adams

                            by Serpents Choice on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:51:31 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I don't agree with same sex marriage... (0+ / 0-)

                            i have a Spiritual reason which is found in the Word of God.
                            and having been a skeptic i also looked at it from a practical reason...

                            men and men and women and women can not produce children.  Therefore you are committing to being parasitic or having to live off the act of procreation by others.  You can not go to a shangrla or exist without us.  If you are left to the laws of nature what would your plight be...

                            I have no fear of homosexuals.  I stepped into this discussion because I have the right to do so.  Just as you have exercised your right to do so.  

                            I have no problem living next door to a homosexual if he or she does not have a problem with me.  I have no problem with the government fixing taxes for them job benefits.  But I think the practice is not right.  Some people believe in the Republican way some the liberal, some the democratic.. it is the freedom and they all are free to discuss how they feel...  

                            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                            by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:07:41 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And so my earlier question stands (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            terrypinder, edwardssl, bluegrass50

                            You have a religious objection to homosexuality.  You also have a ... sort of ... non-religious objection to homosexuality, although I think we both know the problems with the childbearing argument.  Although ... really?  I'm parasitic because I don't have kids?  I work 50 hours a week, so I'm pretty sure I'm not a parasite. I just won't leave a genetic legacy behind when I die, but that's fine with me; plenty of other people do, and I'll be dead, so won't care...

                            But my first question is: why does it matter to you if homosexuals marry? Denying them actual marriage is not going to stop homosexuality. You clearly understand that marriage is important to people who desire to marry. You realize, too (I hope) that marriage is not a strictly Christian tradition; a couple need not be Christian to marry. They would have a different marriage than you would, certainly. But why does it bother you that they might have a marriage at all?

                            I suppose that's related to my personal question. My fiancee, even before her current medical crisis, could not have further children. Were we to marry, it would be a childless marriage. And I -- well, the Bible's opinion about nonbelievers is probably even less flattering than its opinion of gays.  "They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, there is none who does good." (Psalm 14:1). I beg to differ with that, of course, but I want to know your argument here on your grounds. Why is it fine for me, who the word of your God deems abominable and corrupt to dedicate my life and love to a marriage physically incapable of producing children ... but it is not okay for another couple to marry, even if they are equally dedicated, because the reason they are "abominable" and childless is that they have matching genitals?

                            Or is your opinion that, if things were as you would prefer them to be, that I not be permitted to marry, either?

                            "All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -Douglas Adams

                            by Serpents Choice on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:28:44 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  SC (0+ / 0-)

                            how can I get to marrying when I don't agree with the practice.  homosexual practice being wrong according to the bible is as far as I need to go.  but as i said i still have that skeptic mindset in me.  

                            i know parasite is a tough word...  but you made yourself clear to me on down when you said you would be dead...  your reasoning is that nothing matters but your little time here on earth... see you are not an atheist after all.  you are a fatalist.

                            either you can't read or you have a problem comprehending...  how many times do I need to say that I am not trying to stop anyone from marrying anyone.  How can I.  And I said the same thing about homosexuals being around since the 13th chapter of Genesis.  Read the 19th.  

                            14th number of psalms was when israel was in babylon in captivity.  this was thought to be either haggi or daniel lamenting on the wickedness of the chaledeans...

                            we are not as far a part as you try to make it...seem

                            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                            by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 03:20:08 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

              •  You can have your opinion (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                zinger99, Mike Kahlow

                you just don't get to use it to discriminate.

                Everyone! Arms akimbo!

                by tobendaro on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:40:48 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I appreciate that... and you have yours (0+ / 0-)

                  your argument is touching something sacred to me...  the fact that you may not respect what is sacred to me is the issue I have

                  I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                  by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:43:44 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Why should something (4+ / 0-)

                    one decides is sacred be respected when it causes pain and destruction?  

                    Everyone! Arms akimbo!

                    by tobendaro on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:54:56 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Pain and destruction usually comes (0+ / 0-)

                      from choices we make...  how does my holding to the sacred scripture cause anyone pain.

                      I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                      by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:00:38 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  It seems to me (0+ / 0-)

                        you want everyone to abide by your definition of sacred.  If it is only respect you want, you are not quite making yourself clear.

                        Everyone! Arms akimbo!

                        by tobendaro on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:09:02 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I don't know what you mean... (0+ / 0-)

                          can you be a little clearer

                          I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                          by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:40:03 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  On holding sacred (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            tobendaro, terrypinder, zinger99

                            You are asking others to hold something sacred because it is sacred to you.  People here are trying to explain to you that that's not how it works.

                            Let's try something less fraught that marriage.  Do you keep kosher?  Do you keep halal?  Those are sacred dietary restrictions in other faiths. I bet you don't follow them. Why?  Because you don't think they're sacred, or important, or probably even sensible. But others do.

                            When a mosquito stings you, do you swat it?  Do you know that the Jains might feel concern for the karmic burden of such an action?  Will that even give you a moment's pause the next time you feel one going for your blood?

                            Faith is personal.  What you hold sacred is sacred to you, not necessarily to anyone else.  It is not made less sacred -- again, to you -- because others believe differently.  But your faith does not give you the right to demand that others hold sacred the tenets of a faith they do not follow (or, for that matter, one they do).

                            "All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -Douglas Adams

                            by Serpents Choice on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:48:43 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  please show me where I asked anything but to be (0+ / 0-)

                            heard respectfully as you do.  I must have been in a trance when I wrote that please spot it for me...

                            I find it giddy that people worship the moon but I am not in their face messing with them...  no call for it...  I have my own beliefs and nothing there tells me that I need to over shout or our argue you.  but dialoguing is permitted.

                            You made a good point about the kosher foods...  read what I said above...  But if you read the bible you will see that those laws were for the Jewish people and not gentiles...  so they do not even apply to moi

                            if in the presense of a jain i may well ask the to swat it or move on to not be a distraction or problem to him if I may...

                            I think you need to go back and read again what I said about a sacred matter.  I do not believe I said or implied forcing what I believe on anyone.  I think my comment was that what I hold sacred is still my opinion and should be respected.  no matter if the opinion is sacred or what catagory it is placed under it is held dear to that person even if it were something grandpa said once when he was on his knee.

                            now what is more important I believe that there is truth that stands the test of everything and is truth today and 100,000 years from now.  human beings devise systems and contracts, they are made to be broken it seems.  sometimes not an ounce of truth is found in them sometimes there is a smattering and other times a lot with a smigen of falsehood that taints the whole...

                            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                            by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 12:06:12 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What you said: (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            terrypinder
                            why not just go to the core of it the legal process and leave marriage out of it...  why imitate christians?
                            Marriage is not exclusive to your religion. You know that, right?

                            Sure, people can and do have grandiose weddings in beautiful Catholic churches. They also have Jewish weddings, or Islamic ones. They have Buddhist weddings and Shinto weddings and Hindu ones. People wed the ones they love under the auspices of very likely every faith on Earth. And they can wed without having any religion at all.

                            If you want a fact you can take to the bank, it's this: when I proposed, it wasn't -- not even in the slightest -- borne of a desire to imitate your religion.

                            You aren't bothered by the fact that you don't keep kosher.  That wasn't meant for you, you say. Here's one of the great truths: the things you think are sacred? They're not meant for everyone either.

                            So why does same-sex marriage bother you?  No one is demanding that you marry someone of the same gender.  No one is demanding that your church sanction such ceremonies.  It cannot affect you in the slightest, unless you choose to be affected.

                            There is no difference between what you are doing here and a hypothetical Jew arguing that all food must be kosher, because he believes that his own must be.

                            "All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -Douglas Adams

                            by Serpents Choice on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:08:11 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  who said it was exclusive... (0+ / 0-)

                            I just thought that you might want to think out  side the box...  it does not bother me about men marrying men because it is their right.  but what does irk me a little is that you would deny me the right to say that I don't agree with it and put words in my mouth that you seem to not know how to cut and copy to give proof...  

                            this is a discussion, I just thought that I could inject my side in it...  I thought free speech was a right that all men have... correct me if I am wrong...  Am I not allowed to disagree with you in a civil manner?

                            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                            by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:26:15 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You can, but... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            terrypinder

                            ...here's the thing. There's more to civil discourse than refraining from using harsh language.

                            If you mean to have a civil discussion, and the opinion you further in the discussion is one that, if widely accepted, would yield demonstrable harm for the people you are discussing with, then the burden is on you to provide mutually comprehensible justifications for why you hold that opinion and believe it to be right. If you can't, you're arguing falsely -- or at least being intentionally disruptive for its own sake -- neither of which, of course, is a particularly Christian thing to do.

                            But -- perhaps not surprisingly -- I don't think you're discussing anything in good faith here.  No, you didn't use the word exclusive. But what I blockquoted up there is what you said. And you asked why gays seeking marriage would "imitate [C]hristians".

                            My answer there is simple, but you have missed the point.

                            Christians aren't the only people who marry. To marry is not to imitate Christians (and that setting aside entirely the fact that one can be both Christian and homosexual).

                            "All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -Douglas Adams

                            by Serpents Choice on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:40:31 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                      •  It causes pain when one argues that their (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        zinger99, terrypinder

                        sacred scripture should be codified into public policy and laws, i.e., imposing an interpretation of sacred scripture on those who may not hold that same interpretation.

                        You are entitled to hold to your sacred scripture and I respect that.  But they are some (I am not accusing you of this) who wish to impose it on other as the law of the land.  IMO, dangerously close to the establishment of an official religion.

                        This is why our Founding Fathers - whose ancestors fled religious persecution in England - wisely decreed the freedom of religion.  It's also why the Constitution - not the Bible - is the supreme law of the land.

                        The most violent element in society is ignorance.

                        by Mr MadAsHell on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:13:49 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Good point mr madAsHell... (0+ / 0-)

                          where did the institution of marriage begin...

                          I would protest with homosexuals against churches like westboro which is not a church...they are in gross error...
                          religion meant a bit more in England up to the 1700s...  the wars they spun is what finally got the monarchys of
                          england and france to push for tolerance but the catholic church was a bit too big and tied in to money and power...

                          I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                          by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:52:08 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Marriage predated Churches. (0+ / 0-)

                            Freedom to marry does not mean churches are forced to marry gays - that will remain the decision of each church.

                            Under the law, gays who marry should have the same legal rights as straights.  That's what this whole issue is about.

                            Unfortunately, everything I've heard in opposition to gay marriage ultimately has a religious basis.  But the Constitution is religion-free, and that's the document that is used.

                            To be blunt, the Bible (or the Koran, or the Torah, or any other religious document) is irrelevant here.

                            The most violent element in society is ignorance.

                            by Mr MadAsHell on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:00:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  For the supreme court judges (0+ / 0-)

                            but i am not confined to such restrictions...   i am not bothering anyone except giving my opinion as you are giving yours on the same matter...

                            I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                            by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:10:15 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  Okay, I'll play at this... (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    terrypinder, zinger99, tobendaro

                    You clearly believe that marriage has an important religious component to you.  That's fine, I understand that.

                    Why does the marriage of people who do not share that religious component lessen the value of the religious component regarding your own marriage?

                    Let's ignore homosexuality for a moment. I'm straight. I'm also an atheist. The religious components of marriage hold absolutely no meaning to me whatsoever. But I can still get married. In fact, the only reason I'm not married right now to my dying fiancee is that my state's laws for inheriting medical debt from a spouse are insultingly stupid.

                    But what if I just sucked up the bankruptcy proceedings that would follow and I married her right now, today. I can do that, you know. I could do that on my lunch break in a couple hours. Would that make the religious component of marriage any weaker for you?  Would that lessen marriage in your eyes, because some godless secularist in Kansas would be married?

                    You should think very carefully before you answer that, by the way.

                    And then, you should try to come up with one good reason why same-sex marriage is any different than my marrying the decidedly opposite-sex love of my life would be.

                    "All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -Douglas Adams

                    by Serpents Choice on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:28:12 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I think I touched on most of these (0+ / 0-)

                      sorry for your issue with your love...  

                      Once again nothing you or anyone else does changes anything in my realm for the third time.  You fail to get it...  I am just speaking my mind and opinion on this matter just as you are.  

                      Marriage is not the issue here...  The argument has been simply made that who has the right to say who a person can love as an intimate partner or life partner or spouse...  everything else is subsequent I think...  

                      the answer is no one...  they have that right just as you do to not marry your partner for what ever reason Godlessness or rejection of societal 'norms', you call it.  who can stop you from doing what ever you what to.  what keeps you from walking out of your house tomorrow and mowing down everyone you come in contact with with an AR95-261?  What?  Anything?  You may call yourself an atheist what ever that means but you ascribe to some belief and that sir means that you realize that you are not the end of the conversation and someone else has a say so.  

                      some people just avoind dealing with the truth which is evident and is easy to discover if you are not afraid to give time to seeking it.  And can hold down your ardor and PASSION...

                      I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                      by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 12:21:01 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  You're being evasive, and you know it (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        terrypinder

                        This is a diary about the potential of the SCOTUS to empower same-sex marriage.  It is a diary about same-sex marriage. You came into these comments arguing that same-sex partners should not be granted (or, if not that, then should not need) the right to marry. You defended yourself on the basis of your faith, that marriage is sacred, and that letting gays share in it would lesson that sanctity.

                        So let me make something very clear. Marriage is the issue here.

                        You have the right to your opinion about marriage. You have the right to voice that opinion. But, if you do, you have the moral obligation to defend that opinion to people who feel wronged by it, to people whose lives would be hurt and would be lessened should the weight of law side with your opinion.

                        See the quote in my signature? It's not there for decoration. Not all opinions are created equal.

                        So you avoid the question. You dodge. Because the truth is, any marriage I would have is exactly as much a threat to the sanctity of your own marriage as a marriage between two men or two women would be. To wit: none at all.

                        Instead of answering my question, you concoct some feeble metaphor that involves me gunning down my neighbors with an assault rifle. Maybe that's what you think people who live free of faith do? If so, you have as much of my pity as my contempt. You suggest, too, that maybe I just don't understand what it means when I call myself an atheist. I'll make that part simple. It means I believe in no god, no higher power, no eternal reward, no system of karma, no ghosts or spirits, no Heaven and no Hell, no overriding purpose to our existence. And yet I still believe in treating the rest of mankind with love, with honesty, with compassion, and with fairness -- not because I believe that it will be rewarded after my death, but because I believe that the right thing to do is to make this world a better place, for the benefit of all of us, even the people I disagree with. Even future generations who I will never see and never know. Morality does not require God.

                        So, let's try this one more time. Do you believe I should be permitted to marry, even though I not only do not hold your beliefs sacred, but do not believe in sanctity itself.  Do you think that my marriage, in any possible way, could lessen the things you think are sacred?

                        If you think it's fine that I marry, and you know that my marriage cannot possibly hurt you or hurt your faith, then why do you think things should be any different if the person I -- or anyone else -- sought to marry happened to have a similar set of genitalia?

                        "All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -Douglas Adams

                        by Serpents Choice on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 12:56:25 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                •  use what to discrimintate... (0+ / 0-)

                  if it is religion, that what it does...

                  if opinion they just need to be respected...  

                  as a black man I realize it is the right of a bigot to call me the n word.  I thought about it and often tell them so and get in conversation with them as will invite them to go to a certain place and exercise that right.

                  then when the mention being reluctant I ask then why.       selah

                  I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                  by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:12:35 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  you clearly do have a problem and your (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Gooserock

                use of the "friends and relatives" line is a dead giveaway.

      •  What about gays (6+ / 0-)

        who aren't dismissive of God and the bible?  There are plenty of practicing religious gays.  Your comment says all anyone needs to know about prejudice, discrimination and bigotry.  

        Everyone! Arms akimbo!

        by tobendaro on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:39:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Do you understand what practicing a discipline (0+ / 0-)

          means?  A discipline has a teaching.  what is taught in christianity that deals with the issue before us...

          I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

          by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:03:44 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Christianity teaches (0+ / 0-)

            lots of things we don't do as a nation and as individuals.  Jesus would not recognize our society as "Christian".  I can begin a list if you like. Also, Christ said nothing about gay marriage but some about divorce.  Do you think SCOTUS should rule that divorce is unConstitutional?

            Everyone! Arms akimbo!

            by tobendaro on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:07:21 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  what a ludicrous comment ! (6+ / 0-)

        Marriage is a civil contract, not religious.  No one is arguing that anyone should be given a right to a religious ceremony.  You are just spouting right wing religious nonsense here.

        •  then why does it matter that it be marriage which (0+ / 0-)

          gets your panties in a was with the right wing...  just call it what you want and fight for the taxes and what ever else

          I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

          by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:46:41 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  you are either truly ignorant (6+ / 0-)

            or willfully right wing and a bigot.

            First, your comment about panties is unwarranted and imflammatory.  

            Second, it is called a "marriage" in civil law.  It is a civil contract conferring rights and responsibilities on the parties.

            It is the religious nuts who have twisted the argument by claiming that allowing civil legal marriage will somehow"force" an individual church to perform a ceremony.  Nothing could be further from the truth.

            •  forgive me for the offense... (0+ / 0-)

              then fight for your rights and don't try belittle my opinion... you want respect give it...

              I am a Christian...  but I can't stop you from doing anything... if God gives you that right how can I stop you...  but I have the right to oppose what I think is not healthy or right as do you...  i give that right to you...  why do you go right wing on me

              I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

              by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:55:46 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Do you understand (4+ / 0-)

                ...that allowing people to marry in a manner that is not in accord with the terms of your personal religious beliefs does not prevent you in any way from marrying in accord with the terms of your personal religious beliefs?

                Or, failing that argument, that lots of people can already marry who don't care at all about what the Christian faith says about their relationship.  Do those marriages weaken yours?  Do they weaken your faith in the institution?

                I posted a more pointed question for you a bit up the thread.  You should consider trying to respond to it.

                "All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -Douglas Adams

                by Serpents Choice on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:36:09 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  first of all (0+ / 0-)

                  Thanks for asking...

                  now how can I allow or disallow anyone anything...  people are free to do what ever they please.  I may object in some manner and on religious terms or some other but it is your right.  So don't try and tell me I am impeding you from any right.  Nah tru!!!

                  Nothing you do weakens my being except maybe a physical beatdown.  but hardly anything you will do will take butter off my slice of bread...  Your stance on christainty does not, as you say weaken the institution of it...I have said several times today that even God does not impede you choice...  

                  I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                  by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:52:55 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  But then why take the stance you do (0+ / 0-)

                    If you are not harmed, why inflict harm on others?  The Bible itself says that, of the virtues, love is the greatest of these.

                    Why would you, then, say that because a union born of love would not be sacred to your faith, that it should not be permitted to happen -- even (or especially) for those who do not share in your beliefs?

                    "All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -Douglas Adams

                    by Serpents Choice on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 12:32:43 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  you don't want to go into the bible on this do you (0+ / 0-)

                      love is the covering fact that takes in the whole of the law...  even enemies are to be loved, those who use you and transgresser of the law...  I have not said anything about hate...  why do you question my love walk because I don't agree wtih the practice of homosexuality...?

                      I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                      by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:34:16 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  utter nonsense and doublespeak (0+ / 0-)
              •  you certainly have a right to your (4+ / 0-)

                views but I was commenting on how you don't understand the law and the facts about marriage.  You still have not responded to any of the salient issues.  You keep repeating the same thing without addressing anything.

                •  without addressing what you what me to address (0+ / 0-)

                  What laws don't i understand?  what facts?  As far as what I have commented on being salient, I believe they pertain to the argument primarily.  Why go to 6 when 2 is not satisfied?

                  An old preacher preached the same sermon every Sunday for several months.  Finally one of the deacons came to him and told him that he maybe needed to study his bible a bit more because there was more than just that one subject in there.

                  He said to the deacon, why go to another subject when you have not learned this one?

                  Lawyers love to move all over the place when they don't feel it...

                  I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                  by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 12:37:37 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I will try this again (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    DSPS owl

                    You said why don't gay people just give up on marriage since churches object.

                    I pointed out that marriage is a civil contract governed by the state.  What does the preacher say ?

                    "By the power vested in me by the state"

                    Now, the marriage contract, licensed by the state, is a legal contract with rights and responsibilities.

                    churches perform ceremonies, but without a legal marriage license there are no legal rights or responsibilities conferred.

                    Now churches and religious people want to deny legal rights to some people because their particular religion does not condone same sex marriage.  Well too bad. No one will force a church to do anything.  But the churches should not be able to dictate what the govt does in terms of granting a marriage license and a legal marriage contract.

                    not once have you attempted to respond to these fundamental points.

                    •  I responded to what the real issue is in one of my (0+ / 0-)

                      first posts, the legality of being able to recieve benefits and other legalities.  heck gays have been living with each other since and before sodom and the other place.  you are not listening...

                      I am not  trying to stop anything... i am here on KOS talking to you not standing in front of the SC protesting...  the government has the case and will rule...

                      will you copy and paste the next charge or I will take you to court for lying (smile) come on lets keep it real...  somewhere the truth will pop up but lies are evident...  

                      I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

                      by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:41:05 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

          •  that's fine. that piece of paper (4+ / 0-)

            that we get at the courthouse has to say the same thing that it says for straight couples.

            oh, it says marriage license.

            welp. there we are.

      •  let me add: this is the most (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Lost and Found

        clueless comment I have read in quite some time

      •  Huh.. Yet the most passionately Christian (5+ / 0-)

        individual in my office is gay.

        So this statement

        I'm just wondering why would gays or homosexuals want to be justified under what the bible says since they are so dismissive of God and the other commandment other than marriage...  seems hypocritical to me...
        is a complete mystery to me.

        What "other commandments" are you referring to?  Are you saying they're dismissing the killing, the stealing, the coveting thy neighbor's wife thing?  Or what?

        •  May I ask what a passionate christian is according (0+ / 0-)

          to you...?

          I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

          by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:06:49 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  A person who identifies (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            zinger99

            as Christian and actually lives by the teachings of Jesus Christ.  

            Love
            Caring for the poor
            Caring for the sick
            Turn the other cheek
            Hating homosexuality (No, WAIT!  I might be wrong about this ..... Let me re-check my New Testament)

            Cuz people who do not live by the teachings of Jesus Christ can hardly, by definition, call themselves Christian, right?

      •  Well, I know gay couples who are very (0+ / 0-)

        spiritual or religious.  What's your point?

        The most violent element in society is ignorance.

        by Mr MadAsHell on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:09:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  As I watch this guy steadily hijack ... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Mike Kahlow, Lost and Found

        ... this discussion, I'm shocked that no one has called him out for arguing that homosexuality is a choice. He's repeated it a couple of times.

        When someone comes at you with bigotry, hate and ignorance, isn't the best course to ignore him or her?

      •  i uprated this comment because (0+ / 0-)

        the discussion under it is good, and shouldn't be hidden.

    •  The burning question.... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tobendaro

      was the above satire?

      How can we tell??

      Mark E. Miller // Kalamazoo Township Trustee // MI 6th District Democratic Chair

      by memiller on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:04:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  One shoe? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mconvente

      That doesn't sound very useful.

    •  One shoe? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      zinger99

      Is that the one I'm allowed to throw at Bush?

      The most violent element in society is ignorance.

      by Mr MadAsHell on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:08:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I don't see Bader-Ginsberg as a true wild card (5+ / 0-)

    I just see her statement as a sign that there's no real chance for the broadest possible ruling on Prop 8 (e.g. the ruling that would make marriage equality the law of the land). I think we'll see one of the two "middle" rulings (e.g. either it is the law in California or it is the law everywhere there are Civil Unions).

    And I think DOMA will be history.

    "Heterosexuality is not normal, it's just common." Dorothy Parker

    by dedmonds on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 07:34:17 AM PDT

  •  The anti-gay folks (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    commonmass, tobendaro

    have done so poorly in district court during the actual trial that I have a hard time seeing how the justices could rule against the plaintiffs. I know that the conservative justices will find a way, but I don't see five justices doing so. We'll see.

    •  The SCOTUS is kinda odd (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mconvente

      they don't always rule on the strenght of the arguments actually presented, they can rule on the strength of arguments that should have been presented. Or something.

      Minority rights should never be subject to majority vote.

      by lostboyjim on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:13:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Glenn Greenwald - gay marriage snowball & change (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    commonmass

    The gay marriage snowball and political change
    The shockingly rapid and radical collapse of the anti-gay framework demonstrates the baselessness of defeatism

    He points out in the article that some of the 1% supported this change so it is not like trying to change the military policy.

    But it is an example of change.

    The biggest issue of the day is the environment. Change must come. We cannot give up.

    Another excellent article by Greenwald.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/...

  •  Fascinating To Hear Justices And Lawyers (8+ / 0-)

    refer to critical cases in the past years that have precedent while Scalia will refer to critical Hannity shows that he heard  two weeks ago.

  •  *shudder* (4+ / 0-)

    every time I read "oral arguments" and "Justice Scalia" it makes me want to vomit.

    “Reason must be our last judge and guide in everything.”~John Locke

    by sfsteach on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 07:44:26 AM PDT

    •  Can't hate him too much today -- (0+ / 0-)

      He did write the court's opinion on a drug-sniffing case, and the unlikely lineup of Scalia-Thomas-Ginsberg-Sotomayor-Kagan upheld the 4th amendment.

      Police can't come to your front door with a drug dog without a warrant.

      Scalia is pretty bad on equality issues, though. Horrible on civil rights, and a sometime-friend on civil liberties.

      ad astra per alia porci

      by harrije on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:08:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Ginsburg fears change (5+ / 0-)

    Ginsburg may be afraid, but no change has ever been simple or easily accepted in this country.

    We have a long history of pushing the envelope when it comes to change with a good does of violence or upheaval. Start with the Women's Suffrage, move on to Segregation and Civil Rights. And how about Roe v. Wade? Ginsburg may be scared of that issue. But it wasn't any less upsetting than any other in our colorful past.

    Since the Civil War our country has fought tooth and nail for something. Once someone has tasted real freedom it's hard to accept someone else telling you that you can't have something because they say so. Equal Rights? Nope.. can't have that can we? A woman's right to choose? Nope... wouldn't be a good idea given those pesky religious guys hounding us every Sunday. Slavery? Well that's just not economically acceptable to free those workers. It's just not that time yet. Maybe some time in the distant future when we have our utopia all set for the White folks.

    Change is necessary for life. That's how we grow as human beings. And as I always say, CHANGE IS GOOD!

    "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." -- George Carlin, Satirical Comic,(1937-2008)

    by Wynter on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 07:48:38 AM PDT

    •  seen several times on FB today: (5+ / 0-)
      "I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and Constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." -Thomas Jefferson (1816)
      •  Source: Jefferson Memorial (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mali muso

        The inscription is on the panel of the southeast interior wall is redacted and excerpted from a letter July 12, 1816, to Samuel Kercheval.

        "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." -- George Carlin, Satirical Comic,(1937-2008)

        by Wynter on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:18:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  those are some remarkable (5+ / 0-)

    trend lines over just 10 years.

  •  This: (5+ / 0-)
    Another question mark, of course, will be what wildly offensive things Justice Antonin Scalia says during oral arguments.
    I am sure that Scalia will again indulge his nearly pathological need to prove to the country that he is not a human being.

    What is truth? -- Pontius Pilate

    by commonmass on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 07:52:35 AM PDT

  •  My guess (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DSPS owl

    SCOTUS will strike down CA prop 8 and DOMA; however, will defer marriage equality to the states.

    The states, with few exceptions will over time recognize same sex marriage.

    My question is "how will state recognized marriages" help couples receive federal benefits?

    It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

    by War on Error on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:02:44 AM PDT

  •  SCOTUSBlog says Prop 8 likely to be overturned (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mike Kahlow

    ...either by throwing the Prop 8 case out (overturning Prop 8 but not setting nationwide precedent) or striking Prop 8 down (overturning Prop 8 and setting nationwide precedent)

    Link to tweet

    Polls don't vote, statistics don't vote, history doesn't vote, yard signs don't vote...PEOPLE VOTE!!!

    by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:04:37 AM PDT

  •  seeing the red HRC logo show up all over FB (4+ / 0-)

    A large number of people on my feed have changed their profile pic (as have I).  It's quite heartening.   :)  

    •  I can't change my profile picture on FB... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mali muso

      ...for some reason. Of course, I prefer to use my face for a Facebook profile picture and not use my profile picture for political grandstanding. Virtually everything else on my Facebook page is political grandstanding, however.

      Polls don't vote, statistics don't vote, history doesn't vote, yard signs don't vote...PEOPLE VOTE!!!

      by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:28:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  i'm kind of the opposite (0+ / 0-)

        I keep politics more or less off my facebook presence with the exception of making sure to "like" posts that express political views that I share.  so changing a profile picture for a few days is a quiet statement that fits with the way I use FB.

  •  Stupid Scalia comments have begun (0+ / 0-)

    Ryan J. Reilly @ryanjreilly

    Scalia: "considerable disagreement" about the "consequences" of same-sex couples raising children. #SCOTUS #Prop8
    Ryan J. Reilly @ryanjreilly
    Scalia: "I take no position on whether it's harmful or not, but it's certainly true there is no answer to that scientific question…"
    http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/...

    No matter how cynical you get, it is impossible to keep up.--Lily Tomlin

    by Desert Rose on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:09:15 AM PDT

  •  my bet? (0+ / 0-)

    I think the court will vote in favor of gay marraige.  In particular, I think both Olsen ( arguing in favor of gay rights) and Roberts will take the postion that gay rights are constitutionally protected to preserve their place in history.

    Olsen wuold otherwise be remembered for winning Bush v Gore, and giving us 8 years of Bush.  By arguing the pro-gay case now, he hopes to salvage his legacy.  Likewise, Roberts voted for Obamacare to preserve his legacy, and is likely to want to be on the right side of history on this issue as well.

    Cynical view? yes.  but likely true.

    As my father used to say,"We have the best government money can buy."

    by BPARTR on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:11:48 AM PDT

    •  What I do like are the lawyers arguging for (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dewtx

      marriage equality,..on our side, Ted Olsen...Bush's solicitor general, the Obama solicitor general and David Bois who argued for Gore in Bush v Gore . The side of marriage equality has some very strong legal minds with vast experience.

      Follow PA Keystone Liberals on Twitter: @KeystoneLibs

      by wishingwell on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:33:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Equal protection (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bluegrass50, mconvente

    There have been calls in the msm for a middle-of-the-road decision. That makes no sense; it would just be politics. Either Proposition violates the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or it does not. There is nothing in the middle of the road but a yellow line and dead armadillos.

    Censorship is rogue government.

    by scott5js on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:21:57 AM PDT

  •  What is the role of HGTV (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gooserock, mali muso

    in the increasing tolerance of Americans for "non traditional" families? I have long thought this would make for an interesting thesis. HGTV has for years featured alternative families of all shapes and sizes in a non-judgmental manner, and I have always been curious about the lack of backlash towards them for doing this. Any thoughts?

    •  Yes that is true for a number of reality shows and (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      science geek

      cable channel programs. There seems to be little backlash from viewers. TV viewers of varous programs that include LBGT couples or individuals does not seem to garner a backlash or complaints from viewers. So that is an interesting point.

      Follow PA Keystone Liberals on Twitter: @KeystoneLibs

      by wishingwell on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:35:19 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Of Course, It's Canadian Programming (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      science geek

      Made mostly in a civilized democracy.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:20:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  If Ginsburg said this... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tobendaro
    she thinks the Roe v. Wade decision went too far because it forced a consensus that many Americans had not arrived at and led to a backlash.
    Then, she should look at your chart. A vote against marriage equality would be against public opinion.

    Freedom isn't free. So quit whining and pay your taxes.

    by walk2live on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:35:28 AM PDT

  •  In the 70s the Gay Lib Movement... (0+ / 0-)

    worked hand and hand with the Civil Rights Movement.  The Womans Lib had lots of Lesbians at the forefront.  Gays were very prominent in the Hippie movement (free love), the Gay Libs worked with the Panthers in Oakland...

    I hung our in the Height before they painted it pink.  Then I was a skeptic.  I knew that something was going on bigger than I could see.  At that time I never gave a thought to homosexuality, just smoked joints with gays.  I remember a few women trying to set me up with their male friends saying he was cool. When we got into it he showed up and with coolness got undressed and in the bed on the other side.  I usually left and if there was any overt touching on his part I would let him no in no uncertain terms my passions and leave.

    The down low has been going on for ages.  And I saw the aggression of gay men grow to where they openly flaunted themselves and made passes.  Before the catholic church scandal broke I was hearing from kids under me about what Mr. Pete and Mr. Rich had done to them when they were kids.

    I was still a skeptic then.  I came to the knowledge of the Truth of God.  Saw what it said about homosexuality and contemplated and the truth came and I am resigned to it.  

    I have 3 sons and hope I never have to face it but if I do I will not be in agreement with it.  But I will love my sons even if they decide to cut me off.  I will be hopeful until I die that we can relate.  But I will not ever give approval of a man lying with a man or woman with woman and yet realizing that I can not stop it.  And I can work side by side with a homosexual and have not an ounce of hatred for them.  

    I have been in more diverse situations with gays probably than the lot of you.  Have never thought of violence or had excited word exchanges except one time outside a highschool gym with two who were trying to lure some young boys off...  hope the grammer is not too off did not edit

    I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

    by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:15:30 PM PDT

  •  I won't apologize for my opinion which may (0+ / 0-)

    differ from most of you.  but i will for the couple of guys who are upset about my right to have and express my different opinion on here and their misquoting and putting words in my mouth.  Finally one guy did copy and paste but I never denied saying those things.  

    If you do think that i have been offensive or said anything hateful on here toward anyone (except maybe the panties thing) then show it to me and I will explain or defend.

    heck one guy even ripped me for saying i have friends and relatives who are gay.  I have defended them from people who picked on them in their presense and behind their back.  

    that being said I don't agree with the practice of homosexuality.  I don't stair at homosexuals in public or at anytime.  They have a right to exist and go where they please.  

    I had a good friend who works in Starbucks.  We talked had a great relationship for a couple of years.  His boy friend came to work with him and met him getting off during that time.  Not a problem, we still shot the crap and he would come over during breaks some times.  

    One day I was sitting with a relative and he came over with his friend and stuck out his hand with a ring and announced that he was getting married.  I did not respond in any way, my cousin grabbed her face and wowed and whenned and all.  and talked shyt when he left.  

    He does not speak to me any more, but I still tip him and speak to the both of them.  

    it is real for me...  some of you are reading too many articles and don't have an opinion of your own...

    I do...  and I respect people and will give you chances when you diss me...  

    Im guud with what you do because its on you and not me..

    If i don't like vanilla ice cream you won't make me eat it, you like it eat it...  

    I may not be deep, but I am very wide... Honree Balzac

    by meknow on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:42:40 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site