Question of the Day

Gay marriage: what should the Supreme Court do?

...what should the Supreme Court do?
Paul Brandus (Mar. 26, 2013)

Today's Issue: Gay marriage. What do you think the Supreme Court should do - and why? 

26 June 2013 12:46pm
June 26, 2013 - SCOTUS issues their decisions on DOMA and CA Prop 8:

DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment.

"DOMA singles out a class of persons deemed by a State entitled ot recognition and protection to enhance their own liberty."
The opinion and its holding are confined to those lawful marriages.

It relies in part on federalism principles.

There is a "careful consideration" standard: In determining whether a law is motivated by improper animus or purpose, discriminations of an unusual character especially require careful consideration. DOMA cannot survive under these principles.

Bottom of 25-26: The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity. By seeking to displace this protection and treating those persons as living in marriages less respected than others.

In CA Prop 8 case, they Ruled the parties seeking enforcement of the law had no standing in (any) Federal court, and threw out the 9th Circuit's decision, leaving it as a State issue.

This is a close to my statement from March as SCOTUS could legitimately go. The decisions were not uncontested, but they decisions were the correct ones.

28 April 2013 02:17pm
Make a decision on the merits of the case. Nothing more, nothing less. The court is not a political tool. If it were, we would vote for the justices. We don't because justice is supposed to be blind, biased neither for nor against the appellants.
26 March 2013 01:33pm
I think they should legalize.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. "

Beyond all else, THIS is what our country was founded on. The rest of the verbiage was developed to ensure this statement.

We once allowed for slaves - no more. A wife was once considered chattel w/out property or rights of her own - no more.

Blacks and women once could not vote - no more.

The Ancient Greeks, upon whom we base our ideology, recognized the sexuality of Homo Sapiens, and provided for it.

Perhaps the story of Christ and the Centurion and his pais speak to God's take on Homosexuality - I'm not an expert in Greek, but convincing arguments abound on the internet that the specific words chosen, in context with the era, suggest that the Centurion and his pais were a homosexual couple. Christ did not condemn them; rather, he praised the faith of the Centurion. The Roman Catholic Church, in perhaps one of the most ironic twists, uses the Centurion's own words for us as we receive Holy Communion every Sunday.

There are no "victims" to permitting same sex marriage, just a reduction in barriers, a more equal life for our homosexual brothers and sisters.
26 March 2013 01:20pm
Here's what I have to say: gov't needs to get out of marriage.
Add a comment

1963: Kennedy orders a "hotline" between the White House and Kremlin...