Justices rule on SSM (Page 2)

Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn



I read this over and over again trying to find the part I disagree with and I couldn't do it. I'm even down with moon pies and grape Nehi.

Go figure.

Originally posted by Left Brain

Our borders must be controlled.  We are in a war against Islamic terrorism.....we must have control over people who try to infiltrate our society and cause us harm.  That being said, remove most of the controls against people who want to come here for a better life for themselves or their family.  Make it easy to come here, easy to become a citizen, and easy to pay the taxes needed to run our country.  Our system is ridiculously complicated and scary for people coming to our country to enjoy our way of life.

And yes, any two people should be allowed to marry if they wish.  I see no reason for hetero couples to have all the "fun".

And legalize drugs.  Release all non-violent drug offenders from our prisons and replace them with anyone who commits and is found guilty of a SINGLE violent crime against another person.

What else.....oh yeah....bring back Moon Pies and Grape Nehi

Originally posted by jobaxas

Like!  Except I have no idea what either of those are

Originally posted by Left Brain

Our borders must be controlled.  We are in a war against Islamic terrorism.....we must have control over people who try to infiltrate our society and cause us harm.  That being said, remove most of the controls against people who want to come here for a better life for themselves or their family.  Make it easy to come here, easy to become a citizen, and easy to pay the taxes needed to run our country.  Our system is ridiculously complicated and scary for people coming to our country to enjoy our way of life.

And yes, any two people should be allowed to marry if they wish.  I see no reason for hetero couples to have all the "fun".

And legalize drugs.  Release all non-violent drug offenders from our prisons and replace them with anyone who commits and is found guilty of a SINGLE violent crime against another person.

What else.....oh yeah....bring back Moon Pies and Grape Nehi

Originally posted by BrianRunsPhilly


Wow, that seems almost...liberal Except the moon pies and Grape Nehi, at least in NYC.

Seriously though, I could not agree more with your comments.

Originally posted by switch

Woo-hoo!  Still pumped about this today.

This means a lot to me, but it means so much to so many of my friends, and it's been great to talk with them today and see how happy they are.  There are lots of gay couples in our community, and the vibe in town today is just awesome!

Buzzy, giddy, happy

Originally posted by switch

Woo-hoo!  Still pumped about this today.

This means a lot to me, but it means so much to so many of my friends, and it's been great to talk with them today and see how happy they are.  There are lots of gay couples in our community, and the vibe in town today is just awesome!

Buzzy, giddy, happy

Originally posted by BrianRunsPhilly I asked my sons (20 and 17) what they thought of the court ruling. They don't even understand why it's an issue. Amazing what a generational divide exists among our population.

Originally posted by Hook'em

SCOTUS issued rulings on two cases dealing with same sex marriage, but managed to avoid the issue of whether same sex marriages are protected by the Constitution.  

The DOMA ruling leaves many questions yet unanswered, which will decided in the coming years.  

Originally posted by switch

Agreed!

Every time  I hear about a valedictorian coming out, or a gay couple going to prom, I think about how different things are from when I went to school.  I knew kids who were gay in high school, but they most definitely were not out.

My husband runs a kids' camp in a very liberal town, and we have a TON of two mommy and two daddy families who participate in our programs.  When my kids talk about parents, they don't assume a male/female partnership.  I consider that success.  I think we've moved way beyond "tolerance" with this generation, and that is the bee's knees.

Originally posted by JoshRI'm happy that they ruled this way, but I'd still like to see the government get out of the business of marriage. I think there should be a civil union type of contract that any two people can sign and then if people want a "marriage" they can find someone to marry them, but it will hold no legal standing. When I got married, my wife and I used a Justice to marry us. I'm not religious and the definition of "marriage" means nothing to me. We were merely formalizing to the government that we were together. If things like a will, hospital visits, etc. weren't all tied to marriage we probably wouldn't have obtained the certificate even. I think this would be the fair and equitable way to solve this issue though. My dad's sister and her partner have been together now for 25 years. They of course can't be married in their state and it's really a shame. My aunt is dealing with some potentially deadly cancer issues and I can't even begin to think about all of the legal hassle her partner might have to go through if the cancer turned deadly.

Originally posted by switch

Agree completely. I hope your aunt and her partner have enough time to get what they can in order. This is one of the complications that makes my blood boil.

Originally posted by switch

Agreed!

Every time  I hear about a valedictorian coming out, or a gay couple going to prom, I think about how different things are from when I went to school.  I knew kids who were gay in high school, but they most definitely were not out.

My husband runs a kids' camp in a very liberal town, and we have a TON of two mommy and two daddy families who participate in our programs.  When my kids talk about parents, they don't assume a male/female partnership.  I consider that success.  I think we've moved way beyond "tolerance" with this generation, and that is the bee's knees.

Originally posted by pitt83Thought provoking reply Switch: My father's generation was shocked and bigoted against mixed racial marriage. To me, I can NOT grasp this. I simply don't understand how that's an idea which could exist in a sane person's thought process.But I think the previous generation's taboos become the next one's reckoning. Our younger generation gets to decide what is and isn't taboo, adopt that and challenge the status quo to either accept or fight that change. Slavery, polygamy, racism and now SSM has been the last 4 societal norms which have been cast out as accepted discrimination and moved to the "it doesn't affect my life one bit what you do" column.I do support SSM and am very happy for friends of mine who now can be "legitimized" in their love for each other.

Originally posted by pitt83



Thought provoking reply Switch: My father's generation was shocked and bigoted against mixed racial marriage. To me, I can NOT grasp this. I simply don't understand how that's an idea which could exist in a sane person's thought process.

Originally posted by switch Hold the phone...is polygamy in that list?

Originally posted by tuwood

lol, ok that made me laugh.

I don't think it's on the list today, but as the SSM marriage becomes more and more accepted across the country I can assure you it will be at some point in the future.  I can also assure you anyone who disagrees with allowing it will be labeled a hater who is against "equal rights".

My personal opinion is similar to Josh in that I feel the government should get out of the marriage business period.  From a government standpoint marriage isn't a right, it's a civil matter that enables two people to be entitled to legal benefits.  Why not make it just that and call it a civil union.

However, as I just mentioned even if it's a civil union (or marriage) between two people (regardless of gender) then the next question will be why is it only two people.  You should be able to form a union with whoever you want right.  So, there will still be fights to change it but society will determine that it's not acceptable "today" to allow three people to marry or for married people to marry other married people etc.  However, in 20, 30, 50 years as moral and religious beliefs continue to evolve these things will likely change as well.

So, I still say it's a complex issue and it's not just as simple as letting people marry whoever they want, because nobody wants to allow that.  We all have limits as to who we feel people should be able to marry.

Originally posted by switch I actually don't care who people marry or form a union with, as long as it is completely consensual and not coerced, which is my perception/understanding of many polygamist marriages.

Originally posted by tuwood

I don't know a lot about polygamy but I do agree there are some and maybe even many that are coerced.  I would also say there are many that are completely consensual.  So, in order to allow the consensual ones you have to allow the rest.

I'm just playing devils advocate here, but what about two 13 year old's getting married (to each other)?  What about a brother and sister?  Father/Daughter (both adults)?

I am not comparing any of these to SSM so please don't interpret it as that.  I'm just saying that at some level society through the government is going to have limits on who can get married or be joined in a civil union.

Like I said, it's complex.  :-/