Court Order Covering Obergefell and A...

Court Order Covering Obergefell and Arthur Extended To Year's End

There are 15 comments on the lezgetreal.com story from Aug 15, 2013, titled Court Order Covering Obergefell and Arthur Extended To Year's End. In it, lezgetreal.com reports that:

A court order requiring Ohio to recognize the marriage of two married gay men, one dying of ALS, has been extended to 31 December.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at lezgetreal.com.

Sir Andrew

Honolulu, HI

#2 Aug 15, 2013
Why are you still creating new names and locations and trying to fool us into believing there is a host of antigay trolls posting on this site? We all know who you are, Liar Boy. And we're way too smart to fall for such a stupidly obvious ploy.

Religionthebigli e

“saved From jesus”

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#3 Aug 16, 2013
Sir Andrew wrote:
Why are you still creating new names and locations and trying to fool us into believing there is a host of antigay trolls posting on this site? We all know who you are, Liar Boy. And we're way too smart to fall for such a stupidly obvious ploy.
I know, right? I'm a gay rights supporter. The same douche-bags follow every thread. It's their version of porn.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#4 Aug 16, 2013
Bertis wrote:
Why are the courts wasting tax payers money on these stinking queers when one of them is dying from AIDS anyway?
ALS is Lou Gehrig's disease; which is a progressive neurodegenerative disease that affects nerve cells in the brain
.
Sort of like you

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

#6 Aug 16, 2013
Bertis wrote:
Why are the courts wasting tax payers money on these stinking queers when one of them is dying from AIDS anyway?
You would seems to have a selective dyslexia problem. That is A-L-S not A-I-D-S. Now look at the letters over and over:

ALSALSALALSALSALSIMATROLLALSAL SALSALSALSALSALSALSALS

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#7 Aug 16, 2013
So one troll comment hijacks the entire discussion?

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#8 Aug 16, 2013
The article doesn't say anything about how the case is moving forward. Will there be a trial challenging the general Ohio ban? Or are they just looking for this one limited victory before the man dies?

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#9 Aug 16, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
The article doesn't say anything about how the case is moving forward. Will there be a trial challenging the general Ohio ban? Or are they just looking for this one limited victory before the man dies?
They are currently up to the motion to grant summary judgment to the plaintiffs. From what I understand they aren't challenging the Ohio ban on same sex marriages, but the ban on recognition of marriages legally performed elsewhere.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#10 Aug 16, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>They are currently up to the motion to grant summary judgment to the plaintiffs. From what I understand they aren't challenging the Ohio ban on same sex marriages, but the ban on recognition of marriages legally performed elsewhere.
Thanks for the clarification. So many cases it's hard to keep up with what's going on where anymore.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#11 Aug 16, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
Thanks for the clarification. So many cases it's hard to keep up with what's going on where anymore.
You're welcome. I've lost count and I keep getting blind-sided by not so new ones that I'm not stumbling across until they are well into the process. Like that Pennsylvania equal benefits case that I posted an article on its ruling on last week, that was the first I had even read about it. I hadn't heard about the Utah case either, until I read about the state's response to it. If I were to guess, there have got to be at least 25 active cases against the state and federal governments right now, at least and that might be low.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#12 Aug 16, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>You're welcome. I've lost count and I keep getting blind-sided by not so new ones that I'm not stumbling across until they are well into the process. Like that Pennsylvania equal benefits case that I posted an article on its ruling on last week, that was the first I had even read about it. I hadn't heard about the Utah case either, until I read about the state's response to it. If I were to guess, there have got to be at least 25 active cases against the state and federal governments right now, at least and that might be low.
And now comes word from New Mexico that their Supreme Court won't decide the marriage case before it goes through the lower courts first. Not that such a decision should come as a big surprise. It just means a couple more years of delay.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#13 Aug 16, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
And now comes word from New Mexico that their Supreme Court won't decide the marriage case before it goes through the lower courts first. Not that such a decision should come as a big surprise. It just means a couple more years of delay.
The good cases, with the good lawyers at the helm, they're moving with surprising judicial speed. Lawrence took 5 years to make its way through, Windsor went from its first filing to final ruling in a shade under 3.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#14 Aug 16, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>The good cases, with the good lawyers at the helm, they're moving with surprising judicial speed. Lawrence took 5 years to make its way through, Windsor went from its first filing to final ruling in a shade under 3.
Be that as it may, we're still talking years- not months- before any ruling.

I think too many people are misinterpreting the SCOTUS decisions and are simply unrealistic in their expectations of pending cases.

I don't see ANY significant progress in what's left of 2013, and very little in 2014 either. The latter half of the decade though will likely be game, set, match.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#15 Aug 16, 2013
At least it is all one big avalanche heading in the same direction and most of these questions will finally be answered in the next couple three years. A lot of this could have been avoided if the Supremes hadn't wimped out on Perry, but what is done is done.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#16 Aug 17, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
At least it is all one big avalanche heading in the same direction and most of these questions will finally be answered in the next couple three years. A lot of this could have been avoided if the Supremes hadn't wimped out on Perry, but what is done is done.
I actually think the Perry decision was the right way to go. I don't think Kennedy was there yet- or thought the country was there yet.

I've always believed this would be a multi-step process spread out over this decade, but it likely WILL be resolved by the end of the decade.

It's just going to take the right case at the right time before the right court.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#17 Aug 17, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
I actually think the Perry decision was the right way to go. I don't think Kennedy was there yet- or thought the country was there yet.
I've always believed this would be a multi-step process spread out over this decade, but it likely WILL be resolved by the end of the decade.
It's just going to take the right case at the right time before the right court.
Perry merely prolonged the inevitable, the first of the amendments overturned on constitutional grounds, kills the rest. There is absolutely no real way around it. Perry was sacrificed for Windsor, because the right result in Perry would have freaked a lot of folk seriously out.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Doritos makes rainbow chips in support of gay r... (Sep '15) 5 min guest 1,523
News Methodist court ruling a blow for openly lesbia... 27 min Pat Robertson s F... 14
News A look at the judges who will rule on Trump's t... 30 min Pat Robertson s F... 106
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 1 hr DebraE 5,658
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 3 hr Wondering 25,360
News Judge won't hear gay adoptions because it's not... 3 hr Wondering 9
News Franklin Graham's Alma Mater Forcing Staff To P... 8 hr Prosperity Fundie... 1
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 9 hr Frankie Rizzo 48,191
More from around the web