Up for Debate: DOMA ruling

Wednesday, June 26, 2013 at 11:30pm

Break down the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act. What do you think the repercussions in time will be? How will the states react? What is your reaction to Justice Scalia's dissent?

Filed under: City Voices
Tagged: Up for Debate

89 Comments on this post:

By: yogiman on 6/27/13 at 4:54

Marriage is a legal agreement between one man and one woman to live together in order to create new life through love.

Living together as a team of homosexuals for the sole purpose of sexual pleasure is not marriage. It is simply "shacking up" together. Homosexuals could have a written contract as a team between two business partners.

Isn't it strange the Oval Office sitter is so openly okaying homosexuals in our military and homosexual "marriages" in our nations population?

Could his reasoning simply be because he's a homosexual? It sure looks like it. Never in my 82 years of life have I known of a public official openly support homosexuality... even those who were known to be homosexuals.

By: yogiman on 6/27/13 at 5:58

Isn't it strange how so many on this board can ridicule budlight; accusing her of being on this site when she's [at work] yet none of them normally post on this site until after 7 or 8 o'clock on the morning... the normal time common "daytime" employees show up for work?

What's going on, ridiculers? Are you simply being ridiculous or is it because you just don't get up until that time in the mornings?

By: Captain Nemo on 6/27/13 at 6:04

I, think it is a good thing and that there should never have been any laws against who a person loves.

Now that yogi is drooling against this, is just icing. LOL

By: bfra on 6/27/13 at 6:22

yogi as usual tries to tell everybody what they think & how to think and he doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 6/27/13 at 6:27

It's about equal rights.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 6/27/13 at 6:29

Hours after the U.S. Supreme Court found Section 3 of the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional, lawmakers in both the House and the Senate reintroduced the Respect for Marriage Act (RMA). RMA would fully remove DOMA from the books and establish a clear rule for the federal government that all married same-sex couples – regardless of what state they currently live in – have access to equal rights, benefits, and protections under federal law.

http://www.hrc.org/m/blog/hrc-statement-on-reintroduction-of-the-respect-for-marriage-act

As it should be.

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 6:54

As I've said before, I don't think it's something that the courts should be involved in. I also don't think the Feds have any constitutional jurisdiction in the matter.

Let the people work it out through their representatives at the state level.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 6/27/13 at 6:59

Ben, by your "state's rights" logic slavery would still be legal in certain states.

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 7:09

No it wouldn't be.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 6/27/13 at 7:10

How so?

By: PKVol on 6/27/13 at 7:27

Marriage between a man and a woman was instituted long before there was any government to sanction it. The SCOUS can change man's laws, but they can't change God's laws.

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 7:34

Because of the 13th amendment to the US Constitution.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 6/27/13 at 7:40

PKVol, Separation of Church and State.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 6/27/13 at 7:41

Ben, according to your logic the 13th Amendment wouldn't have happened! That's the point.

By: Kosh III on 6/27/13 at 7:42

"Marriage between a man and a woman was instituted long before there was any government to sanction it. The SCOUS can change man's laws, but they can't change God's laws."

By God's laws you mean the God of Abraham? Abraham who married his SISTER?

Why do you insist on compelling people to live according to YOUR religious opinion?

Why not abide by the religious opinion of the ancient Greeks; who celebrated the marriage of Hercules and Iolus.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 6/27/13 at 7:42

The Treaty of Tripoli clearly states that the U.S. is not a Christian nation. Certain people like to think otherwise but it is not so.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 6/27/13 at 7:43

Kosh, if anyone disagrees with people like PKVol they start screaming religious persecution. If they can't force their views on others they feel persecuted. smh

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 7:44

My logic says nothing of the sort. There's no way slavery would have lasted through the industrial revolution.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 6/27/13 at 7:46

That is speculation, Ben. It's easy to say "what if." Your logic states exactly such.

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 7:47

I don't have time for the debate today though.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 6/27/13 at 7:48

Are you of the belief that the civil war was about "state's rights" in regard to slavery?

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 8:01

No it doesn't. Slavery would have ended one way or another with trade pressures, and humanitarian pressures.

The only reason it came to a head when it did was that it was Lincoln's moral rationalization to justify his war to maintain the union. He said so himself, that if he could maintain the union by allowing the preservation of the institution of slavery he would do so. He also exempted the Northern Slave states from his edict that Slavery was abolished. Have you not read the Emancipation Proclamation? It didn't apply at all to the Northern Slave states.

Upon using it as the moral justification of the war and upon winning the war with over 1/2 Million American casualties, the institution of slavery was abolished in 1865 by the 13 Amendment ratified by all but a few of the rogue confederate states.

Following the War racial animosity only grew through reconstruction into another war for civil rights in the 50's and 60's. The Racial divide has been a popular tool of the political class on both sides to exploit for political gain.

How in the world do you equate all of this to some gay dude wanting his sexual preferences for another man to be sanctioned by government?

By: Blanketnazi2 on 6/27/13 at 8:03

Because it was going back to the comment of slaves rights, Ben. That's how.

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 8:18

I think it's outrageous and an insult to the historical abolitionist movement and to the civil rights movement to try to make such an outrageous moral equivalence argument that sanctioning a minority sexual perversion is on par with the issue of slavery.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 6/27/13 at 8:27

No it is not. It's all about equal rights. YOU may view it as a "sexual perversion" because of your Christian beliefs however we are NOT a Christian nation and there is separation of church and state. Equal rights are equal rights and whether a person is a racist or a homophobe that doesn't affect the fact of equal rights for ALL citizens.

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 9:06

I'm actually for gay marriage and all manner of sexual perversion, blanket.

I don't see it as inconsistent with my Christian beliefs but some Christians disagree with me on that and that's something we can disagree upon.

To say society does not have the right to limit what it sanctions as a marriage or that society should not use its democratic institutions, but instead, the courts to decide such thresholds is the view of someone who simply has not thought the problem all the way through with logical consistency.

Minority rights when extended to their logical conclusion would include all manner of perversion that society would and should deem inappropriate. Just because you and I agree that the homosexual perversion is acceptable for society and that it should be embraced with love for our fellow man doesn't mean we can shove that view down the throats of everyone else.

By: BigPapa on 6/27/13 at 9:13

Glad to see this come down, hope we'll have legal gay marriage within a few years, now can we legalize weed?

The USA is moving toward a Libertarian agenda, we'll get yall there, eventually everyone else will catch up.

And FYI the Libertarian party is the only party to have the b@lls to have marriage equality as part of their party platform.

By: TITAN1 on 6/27/13 at 9:16

Matthew 5:1-12

New Living Translation (NLT)
The Sermon on the Mount

5 One day as he saw the crowds gathering, Jesus went up on the mountainside and sat down. His disciples gathered around him, 2 and he began to teach them.
The Beatitudes

3 “God blesses those who are poor and realize their need for him,[a]
for the Kingdom of Heaven is theirs.
4 God blesses those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
5 God blesses those who are humble,
for they will inherit the whole earth.
6 God blesses those who hunger and thirst for justice,[b]
for they will be satisfied.
7 God blesses those who are merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
8 God blesses those whose hearts are pure,
for they will see God.
9 God blesses those who work for peace,
for they will be called the children of God.
10 God blesses those who are persecuted for doing right,
for the Kingdom of Heaven is theirs.

11 “God blesses you when people mock you and persecute you and lie about you[c] and say all sorts of evil things against you because you are my followers. 12 Be happy about it! Be very glad! For a great reward awaits you in heaven. And remember, the ancient prophets were persecuted in the same way.

10, 11, & 12 are so true in today's world. While most of us might not be persecuted, we are mocked daily. Thank you, God and Jesus. You knew exactly what we would always face. But, having you on our side makes it all worth while.

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 9:30

"An ignorant man, who is not fool enough to meddle with his clock, is however sufficiently confident to think he can safely take to pieces, and put together at his pleasure, a moral machine of another guise, importance, and complexity, composed of far other wheels, and springs, and balances, and counteracting and co-operating powers.... Their delusive good intention is no excuse for their presumption." - Edmund Burke

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 9:30

We are a generation are so into the masses being taught that tolerance is life's only virtue. Where will this lead us as a society that suddenly abandons all the traditional mores and values that have evolved in the surviving western culture over the past 2000 years?

If we look to Europe who is arguably a decade or two ahead of us with respect to 'liberation' on things like gay marriage, abortion, birth control, unchecked immigration and multiculturalism... 'tolerance' in a nut-shell. It does not seem to bode well because the indigenous Europeans are being out-bred by the intolerant Islamic immigrants by about 4 to 1 and promise to be in the democratic majorities within decades while already controlling large pockets and localities across the continent. They too suffer eroded protections of individual liberty and property rights that all the 'liberals' in this country are so quick to want to cede to government authority.

What will all of this do to our future? The truth is that none of us know. We are playing with something far more dangerous than our nuclear arsenal though and are doing it with very little thought or consideration.

By: brrrrk on 6/27/13 at 9:32

bfra said on 6/27/13 at 7:22

"yogi as usual tries to tell everybody what they think & how to think and he doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground."

I think I'd avoid holes in the ground around yogis house.....

By: brrrrk on 6/27/13 at 9:34

BenDover said on 6/27/13 at 9:18

"I think it's outrageous and an insult to the historical abolitionist movement and to the civil rights movement to try to make such an outrageous moral equivalence argument that sanctioning a minority sexual perversion is on par with the issue of slavery."

And BenYogiJug brought the word down from the mountaintop........

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 9:35

apologize for the typos... no time to proof.

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 9:40

Actually ignore the other post... this is the correction:

We are a generation or so into the masses being taught that tolerance is life's only virtue. Where will this lead us as a society that suddenly abandons all the traditional mores and values that have evolved in the surviving western culture over the past 2000 years?

If we look to Europe who is arguably a decade or two ahead of us with respect to 'liberation' on things like gay marriage, abortion, birth control, unchecked immigration and multiculturalism... 'tolerance' in a nut-shell... it does not seem to bode well; because the indigenous Europeans are being out-bred by the intolerant Islamic immigrants by about 4 to 1 and Islam promises to be in the democratic majority within decades while already controlling large pockets and localities across the continent. Europe too suffers eroded protections of individual liberty and property rights that all the 'liberals' in this country are so quick to want to cede to government authority here.

What will all of this do to our future? The truth is that none of us know. We are playing with something far more dangerous than our nuclear arsenal though and are doing it with very little thought or consideration.

By: brrrrk on 6/27/13 at 9:40

BenDover said on 6/27/13 at 10:30

"We are a generation are so into the masses being taught that tolerance is life's only virtue. Where will this lead us as a society that suddenly abandons all the traditional mores and values that have evolved in the surviving western culture over the past 2000 years?"

BenYogiJug , you are a fraud. You claim to be a Libertarian but in reality you're just a right winger in Libertarian clothing. A true Libertarian would have applauded the DOMA ruling....

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 9:47

As near as I can tell it puts it back in the hands of the states, brrrk.

It's a decision for the popular majority or their representatives to define the thresholds of marriage not a bunch of judges. I've always said that.

I personally think it's time to sanction Gay Marriage in America.

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 9:48

And when did I ever claim to be a libertarian? That's your label not mine.

By: brrrrk on 6/27/13 at 9:52

BenDover said on 6/27/13 at 10:47

"As near as I can tell it puts it back in the hands of the states, brrrk.

It's a decision for the popular majority or their representatives to define the thresholds of marriage not a bunch of judges. I've always said that.

I personally think it's time to sanction Gay Marriage in America."

Explain to me the rationale of having the rights of a minority dictated by the will of the majority... if we were to accept that, blacks would still be fighting for the right to vote (wait, they still are). We're not talking about whether or not to put a stop sign at the end of a street here, we're talking about human rights.

By: MamaG on 6/27/13 at 9:57

I applaud this decision. I fail to see any reason why two men or two women who love each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together is really anyone elses business.

TITAN1, all those things you posted from Matthew can be EQUALLY applied to someone who is gay. Think about it.

The bible also tells us not to judge, that it is up to God to judge us all. Do unto others, people! If we all lived our own lives, trying to be what we want others to be, and not worry so much about what your next-door neighbor might do behind his closed doors, then we might all be a little bit better off.

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 9:57

Are you saying that society having special rules about having a minority sexual preference is the same thing as society having special rules about skin color?

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 9:59

dang it, I said earlier I don't have time to get caught up in this issue again today...

By: MamaG on 6/27/13 at 10:06

Ben, et al, why do you all try so hard to complicate matters by talking in circles and half-truths? Much of the time I can't even understand what is being said because it becomes contrived and convoluted to the point where all I can do is say, "What???"

By: brrrrk on 6/27/13 at 10:06

MamaG said on 6/27/13 at 10:57

"I applaud this decision. I fail to see any reason why two men or two women who love each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together is really anyone elses business."

Agreed. And this slippery slope, man on dog bullshit that we hear from the likes of Beck, Santorum, and Paul is just ludicrous and nothing more than fear mongering. Do Conservatives not understand the legal concept of "consenting"? Actually I'm sure Beck, Santorum, and Paul do, but explaining that to their mouth breathing constituents would do nothing to get them riled up against people who have "the HOMO".....

By: brrrrk on 6/27/13 at 10:09

BenDover on 6/27/13 at 10:57

"Are you saying that society having special rules about having a minority sexual preference is the same thing as society having special rules about skin color?"

BeYogiJug, just curious.... do you think that a sexual preference is a choice?

By: MamaG on 6/27/13 at 10:10

I think it boils down to one thing: Fear. When someone fears something, they try to avoid it, change it, kill it, whatever. Some of these so-called 'Christians,' (and I use the term loosely here) don't seem to realize that fear doesn't come from God. Quite the opposite. God doesn't hate. People hate. The whole situation is so sad.

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 10:18

I think the truth, MamaG is we don't know where all of this change is going to take us.

I think Gay Marriage is fine, though; but I'm not so full of myself to think I should shove it down the throat of a society that evolved to where it is with mores against sanctioning the practice.

There are a lot of built in rules and long forgotten lessons in our culture; and I don't claim to be so smart myself to just change them based on my whim.

Society is coming along with respect to gay marriage. Will it be for the best? I don't know but I hope so and I think allowing it is the most loving and Christ-like way to treat our friends who are looking for that level of acceptance. And I try to encourage others to do the same.

By: BenDover on 6/27/13 at 10:20

It doesn't matter if it is or it isn't brrrrk. Society requires that we contain ourselves and restrict our behavior with with many things despite what we may like to do.

By: MamaG on 6/27/13 at 10:21

Good, Ben. Glad you are hopeful.

By: brrrrk on 6/27/13 at 10:23

BenDover said on 6/27/13 at 11:18

"but I'm not so full of myself to think I should shove it down the throat of a society that evolved to where it is with mores against sanctioning the practice."

So, you are advocating that the rights of a minority be dictated by the will of the majority."

So much for...."We hold these truths to be self-evident, that ALL men are created equal"

By: Kosh III on 6/27/13 at 10:29

"Are you saying that society having special rules about having a minority sexual preference is the same thing as society having special rules about skin color?"

Yes. Both have been subjected for centuries to unethical social and legal restrictions and actions which made them inferior second class citizens.