Breaking: Per SCOTUS, Same-Sex Marriage is now law of the land.

[NoAdmiration]

If a company wishes to refuse service to anyone for any reason they should have that right. I think discriminating against gay people is a bad business decision as they generally have a greater disposable income compared to their heterosexual counter parts. The gay community is also organized, so anyone who openly refuses them serve will face a backlash form both gay and segments of the straight community. Still, If a business made that choice, I wouldn't create a law which forces the business to provide the service.

It frustrated me that Indiana made the decision to do this, especially since I can't buy vodka on Sundays... which offends my personal sensibilities to no end.

 

[mrjarrell]

Grenada, MS clerk resigns due to her inability to do her job. She says her beliefs will keep her from doing what she was elected to do, so she's resigning. This, unlike the petulance being displayed in other clerks offices, is the proper response. If you cannot do your job, for whatever reason, then quit and let someone take your place that can do the job.

Same-sex marriage leads Grenada Circuit Clerk to resign | WREG.com

 

[steveh_131]

I have a hard time criticizing most any negative responses to an overbearing federal government taking a steaming dump on the rights of states and localities.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Kimmel did a spot on it, asking kids what they think of it.

[video=youtube;jiFDY6N33aw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiFDY6N33aw[/video]

 

[NoAdmiration]

I've always thought of the federal vs. state rights of governance to be a debate between differing scales of oppression.

 

[Woobie]

Your analogy doesn't go far enough. In a proper analogy you know whether I'm going to choose to get off the tracks ahead of time.

You're right, that was a lousy analogy, lol. That's what happens when you try to do three things at once. When I get some free time I'll try to do a better job for you. Sorry about that.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

There it is. First Polygamists apply for license. Watch... no court will stop them.

Montana polygamist family applies for marriage license - KRTV.com | Great Falls, Montana

 

[mrjarrell]

There it is. First Polygamists apply for license. Watch... no court will stop them.

Montana polygamist family applies for marriage license - KRTV.com | Great Falls, Montana

So? If they're all consenting adults what's the problem? The bible is rife with polygamy, so it is biblically sound. It is currently illegal in Montana, so I don't see them getting one anytime soon. Be nice to be proved wrong, though.

 

[PaulF]

There it is. First Polygamists apply for license. Watch... no court will stop them.

Montana polygamist family applies for marriage license - KRTV.com | Great Falls, Montana

Consenting adults should be free to enter into any marriage they wish. Why should other people get to stop them?

 

[ArcadiaGP]

So? If they're all consenting adults what's the problem? The bible is rife with polygamy, so it is biblically sound. It is currently illegal in Montana, so I don't see them getting one anytime soon. Be nice to be proved wrong, though.

Consenting adults should be free to enter into any marriage they wish. Why should other people get to stop them?

Nah, it doesn't affect me at all. Same with the gay marriage thing. But like you said, it's currently illegal. I'm just thinking it'll probably get a case and possibly SCOTUS affirming that it is, now, legal.

Not a lot of countries allow it. It'll be interesting to see the US go that route before what I would consider to be more "progressive" places.

 

[Woobie]

I honestly don't know how they would justify denying it, really. But IANASCJ.

 

[Denny347]

There it is. First Polygamists apply for license. Watch... no court will stop them.

Montana polygamist family applies for marriage license - KRTV.com | Great Falls, Montana

 

[mrjarrell]

The final holdouts now have no legs left to stand on.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/appeals-court-takes-formal-step-to-end-texas-louisiana-same

 

[level.eleven]

When is that preacher guy going to set himself on fire?

Texas Pastor Says He Never Planned To Set Himself On Fire In Protest Over Gay Marriage : News : Headlines & Global News

WEAK FAITH.

What a loser.

 

[level.eleven]

 

[CountryBoy1981]

Round 2. What is the State going to argue? That marriage has historically only been between two people.

 

[NoAdmiration]

In most cultures in history, and in many cultures today, polygamy is normal, it was seen as normal in the bible. The disdain for it is a very new idea. So if you really want to support traditional marriage then you have to support polygamy.

Personally it's not my thing, but I don't bother with trying to legally impose my will on others.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

In most cultures in history, and in many cultures today, polygamy is normal, it was seen as normal in the bible. The disdain for it is a very new idea. So if you really want to support traditional marriage then you have to support polygamy.

Personally it's not my thing, but I don't bother with trying to legally impose my will on others.

Black: Legal and practiced
Gray: Ambiguous
Light blue: Generally illegal
Blue: Fully outlawed.

Not that common. That's why I think it'd be real interesting if this becomes a case, and the US legalizes it before other "progressive" nations.

 

[CountryBoy1981]

Black: Legal and practiced
Gray: Ambiguous
Light blue: Generally illegal
Blue: Fully outlawed.

Not that common. That's why I think it'd be real interesting if this becomes a case, and the US legalizes it before other "progressive" nations.

I don't see how the Supremes could hold gay marriage legal under strict scrutiny but not hold polygamy legal under the same standard. The only thing that was preventing marriage from busting open to everyone was the traditional man/woman marriage and child rearing. Once that historical context and child rearing has busted open, I don't see a "legal argument" against polygamy using the same Sup. Ct. opinion.

 

[cobber]

And are folks assuming that polygamy necessarily involves representatives of both conventional genders? Just to clarify...