Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Landmark gay marriage trial starts today in California
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 406 of 759 (702276)
07-03-2013 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 405 by Tempe 12ft Chicken
07-03-2013 11:58 AM


Re: How does the striking down of DOMA affect cities?
Well, the State law says it is not okay, therefore no Federal benefits are required to be given to those with same-sex civil unions in the town of Bisbee."
I think that's a great question. I would suggest that until Congress does something about the law, the executive branch has a substantial amount of latitude in responding to what the Supreme Court has done. Marital status affects an enormous number of things (e.g. immigration law, tax law, social security benefits, federal health and survivor benefits, tons of military benefits) I expect that Congress won't be happy with the executive branch having that kind of power and will legislate in this area pretty quickly.
Meanwhile, I can imagine that in some cases, but not all cases, showing a valid marriage license will be enough to access federal benefits. The answer might well depend on what the president and his cabinet folk want the answer to be.
ABE:
Civil unions are most likely not quite marriages under federal law. My answer does not take that into account. And my state is redder than yours on this issue. NC's constitution prevents recognition of gay marriage or civil unions.
And then there is this:
EvC Forum: Login
quote:
Gay marriage proponents marked another victory Thursday after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected appeals from Arizona and Nevada involving the rights of same-sex couples.
The justices let stand an appeals court ruling striking down an Arizona law that made state employees in same-sex relationships ineligible for domestic partner benefits. The Nevada case was a challenge to the state’s ban on same-sex marriage. The court did not elaborate on the reason for not taking up the cases.
Note here that the state prohibition on gays to marry created a situation where denying state benefits to unmarried gay couples was found to be discriminatory. How blue is that?? .
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 405 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 07-03-2013 11:58 AM Tempe 12ft Chicken has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 407 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 07-03-2013 2:39 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Tempe 12ft Chicken
Member (Idle past 336 days)
Posts: 438
From: Tempe, Az.
Joined: 10-25-2012


Message 407 of 759 (702279)
07-03-2013 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 406 by NoNukes
07-03-2013 1:10 PM


Re: How does the striking down of DOMA affect cities?
NoNukes writes:
Marital status affects an enormous number of things (e.g. immigration law, tax law, social security benefits, federal health and survivor benefits, tons of military benefits) I expect that Congress won't be happy with the executive branch having that kind of power and will legislate in this area pretty quickly.
Yeah, I especially cannot see the House allowing the Obama administration to have that much authority for a long time. I was thinking we may start seeing legislation come out (pun intended) sometime near the end of the month defining these rights.
NoNukes writes:
Meanwhile, I can imagine that in some cases, but not all cases, showing a valid marriage license will be enough to access federal benefits. The answer might well depend on what the president and his cabinet folk want the answer to be.
So, if this turns out to be the case then individuals in same sex marriages in cities that are in states that do not recognize these marriages should still be able to have their Federal rights, if not State rights? I mean, at least that is a step forward in the right direction, I would say. Although, I think we may see many more laws going to the Federal level after these results.
NoNukes writes:
Civil unions are most likely not quite marriages under federal law. My answer does not take that into account. And my state is redder than yours on this issue. NC's constitution prevents recognition of gay marriage or civil unions.
I think I would have to look into how the Federal Government sees Civil Unions. Well, from what I could find quickly DOMA did specify against civil unions so, I would think that these cases would also apply to the newly available Federal benefits. From Wikipedia:
Wiki writes:
Same-sex couples who enter into a civil union are provided almost all of the rights granted to married couples under New Jersey state law. However, under the provisions of the federal Defense of Marriage Act or DOMA, same-sex couples in marriages, civil unions, or domestic partnerships do not have any right or entitlement to the 1,138 rights that a married couple has under federal law.
This was a Wikipedia page specifically about acceptance in New Jersey, so it may not apply but this line seems to say that DOMA applied equally to remove rights from same sex marriages, civil unions, and domestic partnerships (three different ways of naming the same thing in my eyes). So, I would think that because the laws were found unconstitutional in marriages, a legally binding contract, then the same should be said for civil unions, also a legally binding contract.
Although, as I read through the Opinion of the Court I see this line:
Opinion of the Supreme Court writes:
The class to which DOMA directs its restrictions and restraints are those persons who are joined in same-sex marriages made lawful by the State.
That lawful by the state line makes me think that it will not extend to those who only live in a city that accepts it, but not a state. They did not really include a lot about Civil Unions. It was mentioned a couple times throughout the Opinion of the Court, so I think it may apply to those, but only if that is what the state has decided to call same-sex marriages.
Source
NoNukes writes:
Note here that the state prohibition on gays to marry created a situation where denying state benefits to unmarried gay couples was found to be discriminatory. How blue is that??
That is a pretty funny conundrum that Arizona placed itself in. I would think at that point you may as well approve the same-sex marriages and create an equal society because you are going to pay the state benefits anyway. Plus, you know creating equality is actually a good thing.

The theory of evolution by cumulative natural selection is the only theory we know of that is in principle capable of explaining the existence of organized complexity. - Richard Dawkins
Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night. - Issac Asimov
If you removed all the arteries, veins, & capillaries from a person’s body, and tied them end-to-endthe person will die. - Neil Degrasse Tyson
What would Buddha do? Nothing! What does the Buddhist terrorist do? Goes into the middle of the street, takes the gas, *pfft*, Self-Barbecue. The Christian and the Muslim on either side are yelling, "What the Fuck are you doing?" The Buddhist says, "Making you deal with your shit. - Robin Williams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 406 by NoNukes, posted 07-03-2013 1:10 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 408 by AZPaul3, posted 07-03-2013 3:41 PM Tempe 12ft Chicken has replied
 Message 413 by NoNukes, posted 07-04-2013 12:30 AM Tempe 12ft Chicken has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 408 of 759 (702280)
07-03-2013 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 407 by Tempe 12ft Chicken
07-03-2013 2:39 PM


Re: How does the striking down of DOMA affect cities?
So, if this turns out to be the case then individuals in same sex marriages in cities that are in states that do not recognize these marriages should still be able to have their Federal rights, if not State rights?
The Windsor decision reiterated that only the states, not the federal government, have the power to define marriage. Regardless of what happens in Bisbee the state of Arizona does not recognize same-sex marriage. Therefore gay couples in Arizona cannot apply for Federal benefits as married couples would. Federal benefits, as far as I know, do not extend to civil unions in the same way as they do to marriage thus the equal protection argument for "marriage" in Windsor against DOMA.
The Federal government can still treat marriage differently from civil unions and domestic partnerships. What the Feds can no longer do is treat "married" as defined in one state different than married as defined in another state. This puts, in Federal eyes, all California married couples (including gay) on an equal footing with Arizona's hetero-only married couples.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 407 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 07-03-2013 2:39 PM Tempe 12ft Chicken has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 409 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 07-03-2013 4:26 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
Tempe 12ft Chicken
Member (Idle past 336 days)
Posts: 438
From: Tempe, Az.
Joined: 10-25-2012


Message 409 of 759 (702281)
07-03-2013 4:26 PM
Reply to: Message 408 by AZPaul3
07-03-2013 3:41 PM


Re: How does the striking down of DOMA affect cities?
AZPaul3 writes:
Regardless of what happens in Bisbee the state of Arizona does not recognize same-sex marriage. Therefore gay couples in Arizona cannot apply for Federal benefits as married couples would. Federal benefits, as far as I know, do not extend to civil unions in the same way as they do to marriage thus the equal protection argument for "marriage" in Windsor against DOMA.
Okay, so the Federal Gov't will base it solely upon the designation of the state and will not carry it to the city level. Makes me wonder if we will see future cases coming direct from cities to argue this point later on...
Now, see I keep reading things the Gov't has released and they always seem to classify Civil Unions, Same-Sex Marriage, and Domestic Partnerships as a single entity. Even in the recent Supreme Court decision, they mentioned all of them together when discussing laws that have been enacted in different states, but then continued on only mentioning marriage. Confused me if it was one of those situations where it was like, "Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions, Domestic Partnerships, hereafter referred to as Marriage".
So, the Feds will take Civil Unions out of this equation, so states with those laws might get sued on the fact that they do not offer an equal opportunity to individuals at the state level anymore. Wasn't that the whole reason the term Civil Union was coined, so the states could call it something other than marriage, but give same-sex partners the same state rights? Won't that run into a legal issue now that they can get state, but not Federal? Especially because the entire talking point of "You get everything they get from us" is no longer true?

The theory of evolution by cumulative natural selection is the only theory we know of that is in principle capable of explaining the existence of organized complexity. - Richard Dawkins
Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night. - Issac Asimov
If you removed all the arteries, veins, & capillaries from a person’s body, and tied them end-to-endthe person will die. - Neil Degrasse Tyson
What would Buddha do? Nothing! What does the Buddhist terrorist do? Goes into the middle of the street, takes the gas, *pfft*, Self-Barbecue. The Christian and the Muslim on either side are yelling, "What the Fuck are you doing?" The Buddhist says, "Making you deal with your shit. - Robin Williams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 408 by AZPaul3, posted 07-03-2013 3:41 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 410 by AZPaul3, posted 07-03-2013 5:03 PM Tempe 12ft Chicken has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 410 of 759 (702284)
07-03-2013 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 409 by Tempe 12ft Chicken
07-03-2013 4:26 PM


Re: How does the striking down of DOMA affect cities?
Wasn't that the whole reason the term Civil Union was coined, so the states could call it something other than marriage, but give same-sex partners the same state rights?
Somewhat, yes, since at the time, early 2000, no one wanted to allow gay marriage. Depending on the state different property rights attach to civil unions than to marriage. I'm no sure about other rights, priviledges, obligations vis-a-vis marriage which will very state by state. Today, in states that allow same-sex marriage, civil unions are no longer needed.
In Arizona, we don't even have civil unions. If you're gay, you stay "single" or move to another state.
Won't that run into a legal issue now that they can get state, but not Federal? Especially because the entire talking point of "You get everything they get from us" is no longer true?
You can see it coming. If a state allows civil unions but not gay marriage then a case can be made that this distinction is made to discriminate against gays. The same 14th Amendment issue could be argued. The California Prop 8 case, Hollingsworth v Perry, sets a precedent such states will find difficult to overcome. If they now allow civil unions expect them to allow same-sex marriage in its place right soon.
Arizona, and a few others, that do not allow gay marriage AND have no civil union/domestic partnership laws are a totally different matter. If the state has every right to define "marriage" in accordance with its own values and customs, can a federal court compel the state to allow same-sex marriage? Windsor says only the state can define marriage, not the federal government, and that includes the courts. Interesting isn't it?
Stay tuned.
An afterthought:
In Hollingsworth the district court said the California Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage violated 14th Amendment rights.
Arizona's Constitution contains a similar amendment. Keep in mind that we, as well, are in the 9th Circuit and, even though their judgement was vacated, we have a real good idea what will happen if when suit comes to the Arizona District court.
So that kinda answers my question above. Yeah, the Federal courts can force a state to define "marriage" any way it wants.
Edited by AZPaul3, : afterthought

This message is a reply to:
 Message 409 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 07-03-2013 4:26 PM Tempe 12ft Chicken has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 411 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 07-03-2013 10:59 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
Tempe 12ft Chicken
Member (Idle past 336 days)
Posts: 438
From: Tempe, Az.
Joined: 10-25-2012


Message 411 of 759 (702301)
07-03-2013 10:59 PM
Reply to: Message 410 by AZPaul3
07-03-2013 5:03 PM


Re: How does the striking down of DOMA affect cities?
AZPaul3 writes:
Somewhat, yes, since at the time, early 2000, no one wanted to allow gay marriage. Depending on the state different property rights attach to civil unions than to marriage. I'm no sure about other rights, priviledges, obligations vis-a-vis marriage which will very state by state. Today, in states that allow same-sex marriage, civil unions are no longer needed.
Sweet, well that definitely finds an answer to my question about what the situation would be for the Bisbee residents. Although, as they are allowed to at least legally in their city be civilly unionized (I am so coining that phrase), they are better off than other same-sex couples in Arizona.
AZPaul3 writes:
Arizona's Constitution contains a similar amendment. Keep in mind that we, as well, are in the 9th Circuit and, even though their judgement was vacated, we have a real good idea what will happen if when suit comes to the Arizona District court.
So, with the prior case decisions, it is only a matter of time before marriage equality becomes the normal in America, which is definitely a good thing because it removes one more layer of the bigotry many nations still hold on to. Do you see the change in culture occurring extremely rapidly now or will it still take a good amount of time for the full change to occur?
It seems to me that once the decisions reach the level they have, lawsuits begin to pour in based upon the decision. Which, I find a good thing because it leads to rapid change. It makes the busienss world comply because of the threat to profits, legislation has to follow to ensure protection of the group that was being mistreated. As this is how I see it, and I definitely could be wrong, I see this change occuring nationwide in less than ten years but more than five years, would you assume the change would be quicker or slower than that?

The theory of evolution by cumulative natural selection is the only theory we know of that is in principle capable of explaining the existence of organized complexity. - Richard Dawkins
Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night. - Issac Asimov
If you removed all the arteries, veins, & capillaries from a person’s body, and tied them end-to-endthe person will die. - Neil Degrasse Tyson
What would Buddha do? Nothing! What does the Buddhist terrorist do? Goes into the middle of the street, takes the gas, *pfft*, Self-Barbecue. The Christian and the Muslim on either side are yelling, "What the Fuck are you doing?" The Buddhist says, "Making you deal with your shit. - Robin Williams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 410 by AZPaul3, posted 07-03-2013 5:03 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 412 by NoNukes, posted 07-04-2013 12:17 AM Tempe 12ft Chicken has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 412 of 759 (702303)
07-04-2013 12:17 AM
Reply to: Message 411 by Tempe 12ft Chicken
07-03-2013 10:59 PM


Re: How does the striking down of DOMA affect cities?
So, with the prior case decisions, it is only a matter of time before marriage equality becomes the normal in America, which is definitely a good thing because it removes one more layer of the bigotry many nations still hold on to. Do you see the change in culture occurring extremely rapidly now or will it still take a good amount of time for the full change to occur?
In some states, like NC and AZ, where there is a constitution provision against gay marriage as well as an electorate that wants it that way, I don't see a rapid path away from bigotry.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 411 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 07-03-2013 10:59 PM Tempe 12ft Chicken has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 414 by dwise1, posted 07-04-2013 2:19 AM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 413 of 759 (702304)
07-04-2013 12:30 AM
Reply to: Message 407 by Tempe 12ft Chicken
07-03-2013 2:39 PM


Re: How does the striking down of DOMA affect cities?
I think I would have to look into how the Federal Government sees Civil Unions. Well, from what I could find quickly DOMA did specify against civil unions so, I would think that these cases would also apply to the newly available Federal benefits
Arguably, the part of DOMA that was overruled seems to have applied only to marriages unless a state defines their civil unions to be marriages. I don't know if any state does that, but it is difficult to imagine a state that does not allow gay marriage doing that.
quote:
In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.
On the other hand, the part of DOMA that was not overruled applies to any relationship "treated as a marriage". In my opinion, the in force part of DOMA is much more clearly unconstitutional than was the part that was overruled.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 407 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 07-03-2013 2:39 PM Tempe 12ft Chicken has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 414 of 759 (702312)
07-04-2013 2:19 AM
Reply to: Message 412 by NoNukes
07-04-2013 12:17 AM


Re: How does the striking down of DOMA affect cities?
In some states, like NC and AZ, where there is a constitution provision against gay marriage as well as an electorate that wants it that way, I don't see a rapid path away from bigotry.
What of the ruling on interracial marriage in Loving v. Virginia? How did that play out in all the other states?
No, seriously, I don't know so I am asking. But it certainly seems that it didn't take long.
BTW, I rather liked her comment 40 years after the decision (2007):
quote:
I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry... I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.
It's all about loving.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 412 by NoNukes, posted 07-04-2013 12:17 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 415 by NoNukes, posted 07-04-2013 5:03 AM dwise1 has not replied
 Message 416 by AZPaul3, posted 07-04-2013 6:09 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 415 of 759 (702316)
07-04-2013 5:03 AM
Reply to: Message 414 by dwise1
07-04-2013 2:19 AM


Re: How does the striking down of DOMA affect cities?
hat of the ruling on interracial marriage in Loving v. Virginia? How did that play out in all the other state
The Supreme Court has the power to make a Loving v Virginia ruling that would end the sorry current state of affairs. I simply have difficulty believing they will do so, or that the makeup of the court is likely to change favorably any time soon.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 414 by dwise1, posted 07-04-2013 2:19 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 416 of 759 (702320)
07-04-2013 6:09 AM
Reply to: Message 414 by dwise1
07-04-2013 2:19 AM


It's A Long Road.
What of the ruling on interracial marriage in Loving v. Virginia? How did that play out in all the other states?
The last of the Anti-miscegenation laws was repealed in 2001 in Alabama. 35 years. Of course it hadn't been enforced since 1967 but bigotry dies hard and we still ain't there yet vis-a-vis race.
For the Big Bird of Tempe:
I'm with NoNukes on this one.
I do not think a Loving like ruling from SCOTUS should be expected anytime soon. I think the Hollingsworth decision from the district court in California is the more important decision for the gay movement since it sets the precedent of using the 14th Amendment argument against the anti-gay laws and state amendments.
I would expect a rash of suits in Federal District courts over the next couple years. It will take awhile for these to bubble up to SCOTUS. Who knows the composition of the court then?
If you believe in the societal-shaping powers of SCOTUS over generations as I do then our grandchildren, or in my case great-grandchildren, will see the end of the legal stops to gay marriage. The bigotry, however, will go on for many generations yet.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 414 by dwise1, posted 07-04-2013 2:19 AM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 417 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 07-09-2013 2:34 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
Tempe 12ft Chicken
Member (Idle past 336 days)
Posts: 438
From: Tempe, Az.
Joined: 10-25-2012


Message 417 of 759 (702570)
07-09-2013 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 416 by AZPaul3
07-04-2013 6:09 AM


Re: It's A Long Road.
Well, the next step of the long journey has been begun by a couple from Pennsylvania and the ACLU. They are bringing a lawsuit against the State of Pennsylvania for their ban on gay marriage. The plaintiffs in the case now include 1 widow, ten couples and a child of one of the couples.
It appears they will be taking the same route as the plaintiffs in the California case, by claiming that the ban on same sex marriage is unconstitutional because it breaches the Fourteenth Amendment and it's equal protection.
Looks like we shall get to see what goes on in the next step along the way.
By the way, how many of these lawsuits do you think will be backed by the ACLU? I know they are the fighters for equality in many instances, but will they take up all of the cases?
Pennsylvania's Gay Marriage Ban Challenged
Edited by Tempe 12ft Chicken, : To add link
Edited by Tempe 12ft Chicken, : No reason given.

The theory of evolution by cumulative natural selection is the only theory we know of that is in principle capable of explaining the existence of organized complexity. - Richard Dawkins
Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night. - Issac Asimov
If you removed all the arteries, veins, & capillaries from a person’s body, and tied them end-to-endthe person will die. - Neil Degrasse Tyson
What would Buddha do? Nothing! What does the Buddhist terrorist do? Goes into the middle of the street, takes the gas, *pfft*, Self-Barbecue. The Christian and the Muslim on either side are yelling, "What the Fuck are you doing?" The Buddhist says, "Making you deal with your shit. - Robin Williams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 416 by AZPaul3, posted 07-04-2013 6:09 AM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 418 by AZPaul3, posted 07-09-2013 11:05 PM Tempe 12ft Chicken has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 418 of 759 (702583)
07-09-2013 11:05 PM
Reply to: Message 417 by Tempe 12ft Chicken
07-09-2013 2:34 PM


Re: It's A Long Road.
It appears they will be taking the same route as the plaintiffs in the California case, by claiming that the ban on same sex marriage is unconstitutional because it breaches the Fourteenth Amendment and it's equal protection.
The gates are open. Here come the water.
By the way, how many of these lawsuits do you think will be backed by the ACLU? I know they are the fighters for equality in many instances, but will they take up all of the cases?
It depends on the local ACLU council. Each local council is free to pursue those cases it desires. Depending upon the local resources a case under consideration may be kicked up to the national council.
In a lot of these kinds of cases the ACLU loves to become involved because it's what the ACLU does. In addition to enhancing their public stature these folks are quite adamant about protecting constitutional rights, especially where some minority or unpopular people are being trampled by the state. There are too many examples to cite but one of my favorites was when the ACLU filed suit on behalf of the American Nazi Party seeking their right to peacefully demonstrate and march in Skokie, Illinois, a predominately jewish community in the Chicago area. Up to SCOTUS and they won. You can expect to see the ACLU involved in a number of these suits about to come flooding in.
Depending upon the plaintiffs and the local community, some other local or regional right's group may lead and fund the case. The California suite was brought to the Federal District Court by an organization put together specifically for this suit. They went out and raised the funds, hired the attorneys and funded the entire action.
I haven't heard about any actions contemplated in Arizona. This, it seems to me, would be one of the prime places to hit.
Edited by AZPaul3, : usual

This message is a reply to:
 Message 417 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 07-09-2013 2:34 PM Tempe 12ft Chicken has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 419 by Faith, posted 07-09-2013 11:49 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 419 of 759 (702585)
07-09-2013 11:49 PM
Reply to: Message 418 by AZPaul3
07-09-2013 11:05 PM


Re: It's A Long Road.
Yep ACLU defends the "right" of Nazi murderers to shove their murderous philosophy down the throats of their most famous victim group. Have they defended NAMBLA yet, you know, the "right" of gay men to molest little boys? Islam too of course they'd also defend, in that case their "right" to push their doctrine of maiming and killing daughters and wives who are suspected of "dishonoring the family name," killing "infidels" at will and taking over the world for Allah.
The ACLU is out to destroy civilization when it comes down to it, by championing "minority groups" that have that aim. How about kidnappers who hold women hostage for years to rape them? That's a hated minority group isn't it? Naa, they probably won't take that one on for a few years yet. On the other hand I've been surprised at how soon they got into some of their other stuff so you never know.
But how loved is the ACLU nevertheless. I do find it hard to believe that we've come to such a pass that such unmitigated evils are regarded as good, but at least it fits with Bible prophecy about how evil is going to triumph for a while just before the End. So enjoy it while you can.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 418 by AZPaul3, posted 07-09-2013 11:05 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 420 by onifre, posted 07-10-2013 1:10 AM Faith has replied
 Message 421 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-10-2013 1:17 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 422 by PaulK, posted 07-10-2013 1:21 AM Faith has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


(2)
Message 420 of 759 (702589)
07-10-2013 1:10 AM
Reply to: Message 419 by Faith
07-09-2013 11:49 PM


Re: It's A Long Road.
Yep ACLU defends the "right" of Nazi murderers to shove their murderous philosophy down the throats of their most famous victim group.
They defended the freedom of speech.
Unfortunately the freedom of speech protects speech we don't always agree with, like when it defends the rights of the Westboro Christian church when they hold their "God hates Fags" signs. We're not always going to agree with the speech but it is one's Constitutional right.
I think it's good that there are groups that will defend those rights even when it's that of someone who's opinion they may not share. Sounds like something the rebel Jesus would do.
Have they defended NAMBLA yet, you know, the "right" of gay men to molest little boys?
There is no such Constitutional right.
You're either filled with so much hatred for the ACLU that you'll try to associate them with any group or you really just have no idea what "rights" are.
Islam too of course they'd also defend, in that case their "right" to push their doctrine of maiming and killing daughters and wives who are suspected of "dishonoring the family name," killing "infidels" at will and taking over the world for Allah.
Yes, they would protect their religious rights to practice Islam. Which is not how you represent them in your hate-filled, bastardized version of their religion.
Let's also not forget all that genocide, rape and murder god allegedly commanded in the Bible.
How about kidnappers who hold women hostage for years to rape them? That's a hated minority group isn't it?
Are you saying that defending someone's religious rights or rights to free speech is the same as defending child molesters, rapist and kidnappers? You really don't see the difference?
I do find it hard to believe that we've come to such a pass that such unmitigated evils are regarded as good, but at least it fits with Bible prophecy about how evil is going to triumph for a while just before the End.
That could be said about any time period. It shows how egocentric you are that you think the time period you're living in now will bring about the end of the world.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 419 by Faith, posted 07-09-2013 11:49 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 424 by Faith, posted 07-10-2013 2:55 AM onifre has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024