Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 25, 2014, 04:00:50 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Politics
| |-+  Individual Politics (Moderators: Grad Students are the Worst, Torie, Sheriff Buford TX Justice)
| | |-+  SCOTUS Scenario #1
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Poll
Question: Same-sex marriage finally reaches the Supreme Court.  How is it ruled?
Restrictions on same-sex marriage are unconstitutional; same-sex marriage legal nationwide   -11 (36.7%)
Restrictions on same-sex marriage are constitutional; no change   -17 (56.7%)
Other   -2 (6.7%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 30

Author Topic: SCOTUS Scenario #1  (Read 426 times)
Emperor Scott
Scott
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18660
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -5.74

View Profile
« on: April 27, 2012, 01:53:29 pm »
Ignore

Discuss.

Please only vote on what you think would happen under the current judges, not what you want to happen.
Logged

Scottish Robb Stark
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30158
France


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: April 27, 2012, 01:59:48 pm »
Ignore

With the current reactionary craphole we have as a SCOTUS ? No chance.
Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 27784
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 27, 2012, 02:53:47 pm »
Ignore

Probably uphold restrictions on same-sex marriage.  I could possibly see Kennedy finding a right to civil unions, and in the process overturning the procedural portions of DOMA, but that's more because Kennedy likes to judge the law as if he were Jack Horner looking after some pies in the corner.  He rarely resists sticking his hand in.
Logged

I wonder why Van Heusen never bothered to make women's clothing?
R2D2
20RP12
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21729
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.55, S: -7.91

View Profile
« Reply #3 on: April 27, 2012, 03:02:47 pm »
Ignore

What I believe should happen? Option 1. What I think would happen? Option 2.
Logged

Frodo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13407
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 27, 2012, 05:53:18 pm »
Ignore

Option 2 -in other words, maintaining the status quo with gay marriage advocates remaining tethered to the will of each individual state.  
Logged

ChairmanSanchez
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14756
United States


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: April 27, 2012, 06:07:33 pm »
Ignore


What I believe should happen? Option 1. What I think would happen? Option 2.
Option 1 would rape states rights, while Option 2 allows gay marriage to slowly insert itself across the country state by state.
Logged

America's like that hot chick everyone wants, and illegal immigrants are all the nerds that she should say "no" to.
Emperor Scott
Scott
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18660
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -5.74

View Profile
« Reply #6 on: April 27, 2012, 08:57:36 pm »
Ignore


What I believe should happen? Option 1. What I think would happen? Option 2.
Option 1 would rape states rights, while Option 2 allows gay marriage to slowly insert itself across the country state by state.

Equal rights trump states rights.
Logged

ChairmanSanchez
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14756
United States


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: April 27, 2012, 09:38:38 pm »
Ignore


What I believe should happen? Option 1. What I think would happen? Option 2.
Option 1 would rape states rights, while Option 2 allows gay marriage to slowly insert itself across the country state by state.

Equal rights trump states rights.
It is not really fair to force gay marriage down the throats of those who do not want it. Let each state do it; if gays cannot get married in Ohio, then gays should not move to Ohio. Simple solution in my opinion. I favor gay marriage at a state level here in Florida. But just because I favor it in Florida does not give me the right to force it down in Wyoming.
Logged

America's like that hot chick everyone wants, and illegal immigrants are all the nerds that she should say "no" to.
Emperor Scott
Scott
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18660
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -5.74

View Profile
« Reply #8 on: April 27, 2012, 09:47:04 pm »
Ignore


What I believe should happen? Option 1. What I think would happen? Option 2.
Option 1 would rape states rights, while Option 2 allows gay marriage to slowly insert itself across the country state by state.

Equal rights trump states rights.
It is not really fair to force gay marriage down the throats of those who do not want it. Let each state do it; if gays cannot get married in Ohio, then gays should not move to Ohio. Simple solution in my opinion. I favor gay marriage at a state level here in Florida. But just because I favor it in Florida does not give me the right to force it down in Wyoming.

But it's also not fair to tell a same-sex couple that they cannot be legally recognized simply because others in the state don't like it.  If a person is against gay marriage, they have the right to not marry a gay person or even associate themselves with homosexuals; it is none of their business, and the sacramental recognition of marriage can be left to the churches to decide on.  But telling a person to simply move out of their state because their current state doesn't treat them as equals is no better than telling a black person to move out of the South if they don't like Jim Crow.  Not everyone can easily move where they want to, and they shouldn't have to feel obligated to just because the law is unfair to them.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2012, 09:51:19 pm by Senator Scott »Logged

JCL and the Geologist
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3976
United States


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: April 29, 2012, 01:45:20 pm »
Ignore


What I believe should happen? Option 1. What I think would happen? Option 2.
Option 1 would rape states rights, while Option 2 allows gay marriage to slowly insert itself across the country state by state.

Equal rights trump states rights.

While I believe in equal protection under the law, states rights trump and natural law trumps states rights. In other words option 2. The  Federal government has NO right to encroach upon this most personal of human matters. The states will ban it. Even the ones who the judges have forced it upon the people against the will of the people (California). Indiana's soon coming ban will be upheld.
Logged

Congressional Races
Jackie Walorski (R/IN-2)
Marlin Stutzman (R/IN-3)
Todd Rokita (R/IN-4)
Chard Reid (Lib/IN-5)
Luke Messer (R/IN-6)
Carlos May (R/IN-7)
Larry Bucshon (R/IN-8)
Todd Young (R/IN-9)
Tom Massie (R/KY-4)
Emperor Scott
Scott
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18660
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -5.74

View Profile
« Reply #10 on: April 29, 2012, 02:09:29 pm »
Ignore


What I believe should happen? Option 1. What I think would happen? Option 2.
Option 1 would rape states rights, while Option 2 allows gay marriage to slowly insert itself across the country state by state.

Equal rights trump states rights.

While I believe in equal protection under the law, states rights trump and natural law trumps states rights. In other words option 2. The  Federal government has NO right to encroach upon this most personal of human matters. The states will ban it. Even the ones who the judges have forced it upon the people against the will of the people (California). Indiana's soon coming ban will be upheld.

So surely you believe heterosexual marriage should be prohibited in a state if the state desires to prohibit it, yes? Smiley

And sorry to tell you, but the numbers suggest that Californians are now opposed to constitutional bans on gay marriage, contrary to four years ago.  Your side's position of this issue is becoming less popular each year, and that support is not expected to reascend.
Logged

asexual trans victimologist
Nathan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12264


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: April 29, 2012, 02:21:44 pm »
Ignore

Other in that I can easily envision Ernest's or a similar scenario.
Logged

A shameless agrarian collectivist with no respect for private property or individual rights.

His idea of freedom is - it is a bad thing and should be stopped at all costs.

Nathan-land.  As much fun as watching paint dry... literally.
JCL and the Geologist
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3976
United States


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: May 02, 2012, 02:09:29 pm »
Ignore


What I believe should happen? Option 1. What I think would happen? Option 2.
Option 1 would rape states rights, while Option 2 allows gay marriage to slowly insert itself across the country state by state.

Equal rights trump states rights.

While I believe in equal protection under the law, states rights trump and natural law trumps states rights. In other words option 2. The  Federal government has NO right to encroach upon this most personal of human matters. The states will ban it. Even the ones who the judges have forced it upon the people against the will of the people (California). Indiana's soon coming ban will be upheld.

So surely you believe heterosexual marriage should be prohibited in a state if the state desires to prohibit it, yes? Smiley

And sorry to tell you, but the numbers suggest that Californians are now opposed to constitutional bans on gay marriage, contrary to four years ago.  Your side's position of this issue is becoming less popular each year, and that support is not expected to reascend.

The trend is not in your favor. It's in mine. There's a reason gay marriage don't work. The whole of history bears that out. The reason gay marriage is even bantered about is because we are so liberal about divorce.
Logged

Congressional Races
Jackie Walorski (R/IN-2)
Marlin Stutzman (R/IN-3)
Todd Rokita (R/IN-4)
Chard Reid (Lib/IN-5)
Luke Messer (R/IN-6)
Carlos May (R/IN-7)
Larry Bucshon (R/IN-8)
Todd Young (R/IN-9)
Tom Massie (R/KY-4)
Emperor Scott
Scott
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18660
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -5.74

View Profile
« Reply #13 on: May 02, 2012, 02:21:18 pm »
Ignore


What I believe should happen? Option 1. What I think would happen? Option 2.
Option 1 would rape states rights, while Option 2 allows gay marriage to slowly insert itself across the country state by state.

Equal rights trump states rights.

While I believe in equal protection under the law, states rights trump and natural law trumps states rights. In other words option 2. The  Federal government has NO right to encroach upon this most personal of human matters. The states will ban it. Even the ones who the judges have forced it upon the people against the will of the people (California). Indiana's soon coming ban will be upheld.

So surely you believe heterosexual marriage should be prohibited in a state if the state desires to prohibit it, yes? Smiley

And sorry to tell you, but the numbers suggest that Californians are now opposed to constitutional bans on gay marriage, contrary to four years ago.  Your side's position of this issue is becoming less popular each year, and that support is not expected to reascend.

The trend is not in your favor. It's in mine. There's a reason gay marriage don't work. The whole of history bears that out. The reason gay marriage is even bantered about is because we are so liberal about divorce.



Not so.

There is no evidence proving that same-sex marriage has been proven detrimental in states where it is legal.  And frankly, it is not the State's responsibility to micromanage what people in do in their own lives such as divorce or marry people of the same sex.
Logged

Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines