Topic: Supreme court legalizes same sex marriage nationwide

[BLOOD MONKEY]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/26/supreme-court-gay-marriage_n_7470036.html

Yay! What a day to be alive, Jim! and what a bad day to be a supporter in alabama when the riots start to happen

[X]

Well it's in the peoples' constitutional rights to love or marry whomever they want so this decision is long overdue. In fact it shouldn't have been an issue with from the start, but stupid people will be stupid.

[BLOOD MONKEY]

Well it's in the peoples' constitutional rights to love or marry whomever they want so this decision is long overdue.

They had to stop the radio broadcast on it today because they had hundreds of people screaming: "It's about fucking time!" Everywhere. And I agree with them. 300 years is too long to wait imo.

[theplottwist]

I was literally jumping with joy when I heard this news.

Yay! What a day to be alive, Jim!

[Gunlord]

Fabulous~

[darkmanx_429]

Between this and the confederate flag deal, the world is either becoming a better place to live or there is going to be a major confrontation in the United States between decent human beings and everybody else...

[Shiroi Koumori]

YES! A lot of people are celebrating.

[shelverton.]

Congrats US!
I lol'ed when I read that some people are threatening to move to Canada because of this.

Gay marriage has been legal in Canada for, what, 10 years?

[X]

I lol'ed when I read that some people are threatening to move to Canada because of this.

Gay marriage has been legal in Canada for, what, 10 years?

LOL! If they want to avoid gay couples then those people should move to Vatican city. They'll find no-such refuge up here.

[Belmontoya]

This is amazing news.

It should never of been left up to the states in the first place. The US is getting better!

I can think of at least one more federal law that ought to change now too, since it's not even enforced. ;-)

Better politics and better games. Times are getting good!

[Intersection]

Leave it to me to always have the unpopular opinion, but I don't believe the supreme court has the authority to alter the legal definition of marriage. That role should be left to Congress or to state legislatures.

I'm glad the gay community has finally achieved nationwide marriage recognition, but for me a supreme court decision wasn't the right way to do it. There's something inherently political about this decision that I'm not very happy about.

It's also worth noting how thoroughly reductionist the most popular view on gay marriage is; if it really was all about "people who love each other should get married", we'd basically be left with a non-issue. The thing is, legal marriage comes with a complicated assortment of legal benefits and constraints, and IMO adapting them to gay couples requires at least some degree of legislative thought, not a unilateral judicial decision.

[SomaCruz]

That's definitely one step closer to gay acceptance in the United States.

[PFG9000]

Well it's in the peoples' constitutional rights to love or marry whomever they want so this decision is long overdue.

It is?  Where does the constitution address marriage?

My concern is that changing the definition of marriage opens up a can of worms.  If it's only about consenting adults who love each other, then why should incest between consenting adults be illegal?  Why should polygamy be illegal?

[GuyStarwind]

I don't support gay marriage or being gay in general but hopefully with this being done we can tackle something more important here. Like I said I'm not a fan of the stuff but I respect people's rights. So, I'm kinda eh with the whole thing.

[X]

It is?  Where does the constitution address marriage?

It doesn't address that directly however it would be considered under the rights of the people.

The first ten amendments to the Constitution—the Bill of Rights—came into effect on December 15, 1791, limiting the powers of the federal government of the United States and protecting the rights of all citizens, residents and visitors in American territory.

"The Bill of Rights protects freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the right to keep and bear arms, the freedom of assembly and the freedom to petition. It also prohibits unreasonable search and seizure, cruel and unusual punishment and compelled self-incrimination. Among the legal protections it affords, the Bill of Rights prohibits Congress from making any law respecting establishment of religion and prohibits the federal government from depriving any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law. In federal criminal cases it requires indictment by a grand jury for any capital offense, or infamous crime, guarantees a speedy public trial with an impartial jury in the district in which the crime occurred, and prohibits double jeopardy."

then why should incest between consenting adults be illegal?

I believe insest is illegal not so much in terms of morals but due to the fact that it is damaging to the human genome. Many royal peoples of other nations did this in the belief it would keep their royal blood strong. When in reality it caused all sorts of health problems due to the lack unique DNA with in the genome. It is the difference that makes us strong. Without a fresh infusion of DNA we would eventually die off. This almost happened to the Egyptian royal dynasty.

Why should polygamy be illegal?

If everyone in practicing polygamy was in full agreement then I don't see much of an issue with it. The problem is that it's not like that and this is due to the fact that the only ones who're doing this are those segregated religious sects. The Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day saints, formally run by Warren Jeffs, is a good example of this. They forced women of young age (teens to be exact) and have then marry seniors who're in their 60's and over. The women do not get a choice in this and it is very disturbing as it violates their rights under the charter. There is supposed to be a segregation of church and state yet you have these nutjobs start up their own religions so they can side-step the law to some extent and do whatever they want to their followers. Religious freedom is one thing. Oppression used under the belief of religion is another thing entirely.