Why the Supreme Court may not say ‘I ...

Why the Supreme Court may not say ‘I do’ to gay marriage

There are 567 comments on the news.yahoo.com story from Jun 18, 2013, titled Why the Supreme Court may not say ‘I do’ to gay marriage. In it, news.yahoo.com reports that:

With the Supreme Court expected to issue major rulings on same-sex marriage any day now, ABC News court watcher Terry Moran tells Top Line that the court will likely avoid making a monumental ruling on the issue.

Moran says the justices “don’t want to be the judges of America when it comes to this issue” and predicts that they will find a way to defer to the states in the two cases dealing with same-sex marriage.

“They see this roiling democratic debate that's happening state-by-state, and the betting at the Supreme Court is that they'll find a way to decide this issue by getting themselves out of it,” Moran says. “They won't declare gay marriage legal all over the country or illegal. They'll say, 'Let the states handle it.'"

Join the discussion below, or Read more at news.yahoo.com.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#205 Jun 21, 2013
Stop-It-Now- wrote:
<quoted text>I don't know anyone who belongs to the anti-same sex marriage crowd. I do know people who belong to the normal marriage crowd.
And how about the same sex marriage crowd? If a sweeping ruling is issued that upholds DOMA and upholds normal marriages nationwide, will they graciously admit that they were wrong all along, and take to the streets to celebrate, or will they continue to piss and moan and wave their rainbow flags around public bathrooms in protest?
Most "normal marriages" end in divorce. Says a lot about how much you folks really value "normal marriages".

You're anti same sex marriage. Calling it cotton candy doesn't change your bigotry.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#206 Jun 21, 2013
Supreme Court wrote:
<quoted text>
There are 6 Catholics on the US Supreme Court.
You didn't get much learnin in that glory whole behind the pumpkin patch.
maybe not but I bet you made a lot of money off of it just like any other good catholic would.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#207 Jun 21, 2013
Supreme Court wrote:
<quoted text>
There are 6 Catholics on the US Supreme Court.
You didn't get much learnin in that glory whole behind the pumpkin patch.
That was the one your Daddy made right?

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#208 Jun 21, 2013
magadala wrote:
Gays presented their case wrong!!! This isn't about gays getting married, it's about getting the financial benefits of having shared a relationship with someone over a period of time, based solely on sexual compatibility. Basing an entire movement on a specific sexual preference is rather flimsy in my book.
sort of like all those laws that make only heterosexuals ABLE TO MARRY?
magadala wrote:
Generally, gays are not readily identifiable unless they chose to, "come out," but that's a personal decision. I personally have never wanted to share my sexual preferences with anyone other than my intended partner.
You want us to believe you didn't place any announcements in the papers about your engagement and wedding? Right. And when you introduce him you call him something besides your husband? Doubtful.
magadala wrote:
If we allow gays to get "married" and enjoy the benefits, why can't I get with my best friend and we live together in a straight relationship and reap the benefits like a married couple? If not, then why not, if gays can do it? I don't mean lie about it, I mean just us friends...can't we marry too, to get the benefits? Doesn't make sense!
Sorry gays, people like Blacks, Asians, handicapped, etc., they don't have the luxury of "coming out" they have no choice, they were out the day they were born and will be until they die!
Make up your mind. After all it's not that big. You just got done saying that you didn't think marriage should be based on one's sexual identity. You have no valid reasons for denying me full citizenship and the full benefits of our laws.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#209 Jun 21, 2013
magadala wrote:
<quoted text>
You are on the defensive, I am sincerely trying to understand the logic. I have not made one disparaging comment about gays or being gay...and am not blaming gays for screwing up heterosexual marriages...geeze! As a matter of fact, I have noted among my gay acquaintances that their relationships are no better or worse than straights! Congratulations on your length of time in a relationship, I hope you aren't saying because you are gay that you have a long relationship, because I can start about how most gay men tend toward multiple partners. I lived in SF for decades. I remember the bath houses where a guy could go from cubicle to cubicle, which was the beginning of the AIDS epidemic. I was there!
Simply saying gays marrying have nothing to do with heteros marrying. Good or bad, both will keep right on doing what they've been doing. The only difference is now our relationships will be legally recognized by the federal govt.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#210 Jun 21, 2013
Cant Wait wrote:
<quoted text>
Not at the Supreme Court.
This is it, Muffin Top.
It's never over.

Any SCOTUS decision can be overturned later by a subsequent SCOTUS.

It'll never be over until we have equality nationwide.

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

#211 Jun 21, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
It's never over.
Any SCOTUS decision can be overturned later by a subsequent SCOTUS.
It'll never be over until we have equality nationwide.
Oh, it won't be over then. Our next big civil rights fight will be NATIONWIDE GAY FIRST-COUSIN MARRIAGE !

:)

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#212 Jun 21, 2013
Mathematica wrote:
<quoted text>
That's wrong. Look at how she says unrelated. With all the babies homosexuals are trying to steal, we'll grow up not knowing who we're related to.
.....
I've never heard of a case where a gay couple has stolen a child. Now, we often adopt the unwanted results of irresponsible heterosexual fornication - but that's a GOOD thing.

And, really, only the anti-gay bigots seem keen on incest.

Normal people aren't.
THIS IS IT

Chicago, IL

#213 Jun 21, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
I've never heard of a case where a gay couple has stolen a child. Now, we often adopt the unwanted results of irresponsible heterosexual fornication - but that's a GOOD thing.
And, really, only the anti-gay bigots seem keen on incest.
Normal people aren't.
No, your mistake was that first cousins can marry in some states.

Good to see that anger, though.

You're running the Kubler Ross gauntlet.
THIS IS IT

Chicago, IL

#214 Jun 21, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
It's never over.
Any SCOTUS decision can be overturned later by a subsequent SCOTUS.
It'll never be over until we have equality nationwide.
The incognito homosexual on his last legs (AIDS) who funded Boies and Olson didn't care about you, Sheeple.

He only cared about getting it before AIDS got him.

Homosexuals like yourself are drawn to crazy risk--it's who you are.

"Don't hate that incognito homosexual with AIDS, for he is you."
--William Shakespeare (a Catholic)
THIS IS IT

Chicago, IL

#216 Jun 21, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>maybe not but I bet you made a lot of money off of it just like any other good catholic would.
OK, these are good lines, but, dnf, you're responding three days late.

Doesn't matter; you said you're on the cocktail. They're funny lines.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#217 Jun 21, 2013
THIS IS IT wrote:
<quoted text>
The incognito homosexual on his last legs (AIDS) who funded Boies and Olson didn't care about you, Sheeple.
He only cared about getting it before AIDS got him.
Homosexuals like yourself are drawn to crazy risk--it's who you are.
"Don't hate that incognito homosexual with AIDS, for he is you."
--William Shakespeare (a Catholic)
Soooo boring.

Come back when you have something pertinent to say.

Since: Jan 12

Port Richey, FL

#218 Jun 22, 2013
magadala wrote:
<quoted text>
You are on the defensive, I am sincerely trying to understand the logic. I have not made one disparaging comment about gays or being gay...and am not blaming gays for screwing up heterosexual marriages...geeze! As a matter of fact, I have noted among my gay acquaintances that their relationships are no better or worse than straights! Congratulations on your length of time in a relationship, I hope you aren't saying because you are gay that you have a long relationship, because I can start about how most gay men tend toward multiple partners. I lived in SF for decades. I remember the bath houses where a guy could go from cubicle to cubicle, which was the beginning of the AIDS epidemic. I was there!
and you were there going from cubical to cubical as well I suppose

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#219 Jun 22, 2013
THIS IS IT wrote:
<quoted text>
No, your mistake was that first cousins can marry in some states.
Good to see that anger, though.
You're running the Kubler Ross gauntlet.
1 COR. 7:36 ("But if a man thinketh that he behaveth himself unseemly toward his virgin daughter...and if need so requireth, let him do what he will; he sinneth not; let them marry"--AS) versus the BBE, NAB, KJ, NI, NEB, NWT AND ML which omit the word "daughter." The latter don't agree with the ASV's teaching that fathers should marry their daughters rather than behave "unseemly" toward them.
magadala

Vashon, WA

#220 Jun 22, 2013
Gay And Proud wrote:
<quoted text>
There are plenty of straight men, and women, who have multiple sex partners. They sometimes call themselves "swingers", or "players", or merely "studs" or "sexually active." In some places they call their random meetups "dogging". Sometimes they meet up in nightclubs and sometimes they meet up other ways.
Despite all this, heterosexual couples are still allowed to legally marry.
It was merely to respond to the fact that he was touting his long term gay marriage as typical of homosexual relationships, we know differently, don't we? And, yes, there are groups of straights that swing...but certainly NOT on the scale of homosexual men! Own it! I lived in SF for over 20yrs, I had gay male friends who would boast about how many they could "turn" on Market Street during their lunch hour. When they hooked up with a tourist, they would tell them, "Welcome to SF!" Also, in the Castro District, there were apartment buildings with small rooms that allowed men to roam from room to room...same was true with bath houses. COME ON!!! You least of all should play the minority victim role!

Since: Apr 08

Cleveland, OH

#221 Jun 22, 2013
magadala wrote:
<quoted text>
It was merely to respond to the fact that he was touting his long term gay marriage as typical of homosexual relationships, we know differently, don't we? And, yes, there are groups of straights that swing...but certainly NOT on the scale of homosexual men! Own it! I lived in SF for over 20yrs, I had gay male friends who would boast about how many they could "turn" on Market Street during their lunch hour. When they hooked up with a tourist, they would tell them, "Welcome to SF!" Also, in the Castro District, there were apartment buildings with small rooms that allowed men to roam from room to room...same was true with bath houses. COME ON!!! You least of all should play the minority victim role!
When you hang out with the bar crowd it's no surprise that you think everyone is like that. But you're wrong. There are LOTS of same-sex couples who are long term partners, and LOTS of LGBT people who are no more promiscuous than average heterosexuals.

I'm gay and have been in a monogamous relationship with my same-sex partner for 25 years now. We're married (we're Canadian and same-sex marriage is legal for us) and are raising two kids. We have lots of gay friends who are in long term relationships too.

We lived in the Phoenix AZ area back around 2001-2003 and while there we were members of a social club for gay male couples. It provided a once-a-month opportunity for gay couples to meet other gay couples socially. It was NOT a sex club. When we were members there were something like 70 or 80 couples (140 to 160 members) and my partner and I were among the couples who had been together the shortest -- and we had been together over a decade at that point.

My point is that it's obvious you have a really stereotypical view of LGBT people that is not necessarily accurate. It's no better than me basing my opinion of all heterosexuals on the homophobic trolls who regularly post here on Topix.(I know better!)
magadala

Vashon, WA

#222 Jun 22, 2013
Gay And Proud wrote:
<quoted text>
When you hang out with the bar crowd it's no surprise that you think everyone is like that. But you're wrong. There are LOTS of same-sex couples who are long term partners, and LOTS of LGBT people who are no more promiscuous than average heterosexuals.
I'm gay and have been in a monogamous relationship with my same-sex partner for 25 years now. We're married (we're Canadian and same-sex marriage is legal for us) and are raising two kids. We have lots of gay friends who are in long term relationships too.
We lived in the Phoenix AZ area back around 2001-2003 and while there we were members of a social club for gay male couples. It provided a once-a-month opportunity for gay couples to meet other gay couples socially. It was NOT a sex club. When we were members there were something like 70 or 80 couples (140 to 160 members) and my partner and I were among the couples who had been together the shortest -- and we had been together over a decade at that point.
My point is that it's obvious you have a really stereotypical view of LGBT people that is not necessarily accurate. It's no better than me basing my opinion of all heterosexuals on the homophobic trolls who regularly post here on Topix.(I know better!)
Congratulations on the groups of you who have long term relationships! It's good to hear! But your casting aspersions on the crowds that I hung out with is rather narrow minded. I lived in SF for almost 25 yrs. I knew gays in every kind of relationship imaginable...to dismiss the promiscuity of gay men as an aberration rather than a reality is quite revealing to me!

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

#223 Jun 22, 2013
magadala wrote:
<quoted text>
Congratulations on the groups of you who have long term relationships! It's good to hear! But your casting aspersions on the crowds that I hung out with is rather narrow minded. I lived in SF for almost 25 yrs. I knew gays in every kind of relationship imaginable...to dismiss the promiscuity of gay men as an aberration rather than a reality is quite revealing to me!
And with a 50% divorce rate amongst heterosexuals, and a 75% rate of black babies being born to unwed mothers, what is the promiscuity rate among str8s ? Any better than among LGBT Americans ?
magadala

Vashon, WA

#224 Jun 22, 2013
Europa Report wrote:
<quoted text>
And with a 50% divorce rate amongst heterosexuals, and a 75% rate of black babies being born to unwed mothers, what is the promiscuity rate among str8s ? Any better than among LGBT Americans ?
Interesting...how are you defining promiscuity? Interesting that you equate it with a 50% divorce rate with a 75% black babies born to unwed mothers defies the imagination. You have truly gone off the page! I have been married twice and am certainly NOT promiscuous! Are you saying that since people don't choose to stay together or a group of people remain unmarried but have children is a sign of promiscuity and low morals?!!! You are doing the same thing you don't want people to do to you!!! Geeze! Another self serving hyprocrite!!!!

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

#225 Jun 22, 2013
magadala wrote:
<quoted text>
Interesting...how are you defining promiscuity? Interesting that you equate it with a 50% divorce rate with a 75% black babies born to unwed mothers defies the imagination. You have truly gone off the page! I have been married twice and am certainly NOT promiscuous! Are you saying that since people don't choose to stay together or a group of people remain unmarried but have children is a sign of promiscuity and low morals?!!! You are doing the same thing you don't want people to do to you!!! Geeze! Another self serving hyprocrite!!!!
You seemed to be saying that all gay men are promiscuous solely due to their sexual orientation, while ignoring the fact that many str8s are just as promiscuous, if not more so. Sexual orientation is not in and of itself indicative of promiscuity.

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
Looking for a girlfriend for a married bi-sexual (Aug '08) 7 min Pleasures feminin... 55
News Singer Greg Gould: 'I was told not to be too gay' 1 hr Marco R s Secret ... 1
News Gay Pride just 'not black enough' 1 hr Marco R s Secret ... 1
News Scientists reveal lesbians are MUCH more likely... 1 hr Marco R s Secret ... 6
News Is your child a "prehomosexual"? Forecasting ad... (Sep '10) 1 hr Dr. Q 773
News Trans woman in Halifax questions if prejudice i... 2 hr Dr. Q 6
News Hundreds rally, march for transgender rights in... 2 hr Dr. Q 4
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 7 hr Constitution 101 24,775
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 8 hr TomInElPaso 45,145
More from around the web