How the Supreme Court's Decision on Gay Marriage Will Affect Iowa Same-Sex Couples

Jun 24, 2013 Full story: KIMT 27

All eyes are on the Supreme Court as it is set to rule on some controversial issues, and that includes same-sex marriage.

Full Story
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#1 Jun 24, 2013
I truly believe that Section 3 of DOMA will be tossed basically because currently Section 3 violates the first section of the Equal Protection Act known as the 14th Amendment.

A law can not grant one legally married couple rights, benefits and privileges while denying them to another legally married couple just because the gender make-up is different.

Section 3 being ruled Unconstitutional will give ALL of those legally married Same-Sex Couples federal recognition that they have been denied since 2004.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#2 Jun 25, 2013
Assuming DOMA is tossed, I think it will be up to the President to decide whether married same-sex couples in states which don't currently allow or recognize their marriage will get federal recognition.

The military, the IRS, SSA, etc, all use different rules to determine who's married. Lacking a clear direction from the SCOTUS, it will be up to the administration to implement a uniform policy.

But first things first; let's see if the court issues a ruling today.

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#3 Jun 25, 2013
No ruling today......3 more cases were decided, but not DOMA Section 3 or Prop 8!

So Sheeple, what you appear to be saying is that even if Section 3 is tossed, we still won't have federal recognition, rights, benefits and privileges? Then why the hell have we been fighting any of this if now different federal agencies have different guidelines to determine who's married or not?

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#4 Jun 25, 2013
Just heard on the news that the ruling on Prop 8 and DOMA will be handed down tomorrow at 10 am Eastern time!!!

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

#5 Jun 25, 2013

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#6 Jun 25, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
Assuming DOMA is tossed, I think it will be up to the President to decide whether married same-sex couples in states which don't currently allow or recognize their marriage will get federal recognition.
The military, the IRS, SSA, etc, all use different rules to determine who's married. Lacking a clear direction from the SCOTUS, it will be up to the administration to implement a uniform policy.
But first things first; let's see if the court issues a ruling today.
How would it be that the president would be able to further define or interpret a SCOTUS ruling? I don't get that. Has it ever happened before?

It seems odd to me that the president would be in a position to dictate how a SCOTUS ruling is interpreted. Although, if that is the case, it's a good thing our current president is a constitutional law professor.

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

#7 Jun 25, 2013
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
How would it be that the president would be able to further define or interpret a SCOTUS ruling? I don't get that. Has it ever happened before?
It seems odd to me that the president would be in a position to dictate how a SCOTUS ruling is interpreted. Although, if that is the case, it's a good thing our current president is a constitutional law professor.
constitutional law professor ???!!! ROFL !

He hasn't even READ IT !

ROFL !

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#8 Jun 25, 2013
NorCal Native wrote:
No ruling today......3 more cases were decided, but not DOMA Section 3 or Prop 8!
So Sheeple, what you appear to be saying is that even if Section 3 is tossed, we still won't have federal recognition, rights, benefits and privileges? Then why the hell have we been fighting any of this if now different federal agencies have different guidelines to determine who's married or not?
I'm saying if section 3 is tossed, those married same-sex couples living in the 12 states (& DC) which currently recognize our marriages will receive federal benefits. Those who live in other states will likely need executive action to ensure uniform treatment.

The military has always used the state where the marriage license was issued, but the SSA has always used the state of residence as the determining factor. Other agencies have other rules.

In 99%+ of cases in the past those rules made no real difference because everyone recognized everyone else's marriage. But now those different rules will be evident.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#9 Jun 25, 2013
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
How would it be that the president would be able to further define or interpret a SCOTUS ruling? I don't get that. Has it ever happened before?
It seems odd to me that the president would be in a position to dictate how a SCOTUS ruling is interpreted. Although, if that is the case, it's a good thing our current president is a constitutional law professor.
Unless the SCOTUS ruling specifically states that all married same-sex couples will (or will not) get federal benefits regardless of where they live, then there will be a dispute as to whether they are entitled to federal benefits or not if they live in a state which doesn't recognize their marriage.

Since the administration & congress control all federal agencies, it will be up to the administration & congress to give direction to the federal agencies as to who gets what benefits.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#10 Jun 25, 2013
Europa Report wrote:
<quoted text>
constitutional law professor ???!!! ROFL !
He hasn't even READ IT !
ROFL !
Wait until President Hillary nominates former President Obama to replace Kennedy or Scalia on the SCOTUS!

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#11 Jun 25, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm saying if section 3 is tossed, those married same-sex couples living in the 12 states (& DC) which currently recognize our marriages will receive federal benefits. Those who live in other states will likely need executive action to ensure uniform treatment.
The military has always used the state where the marriage license was issued, but the SSA has always used the state of residence as the determining factor. Other agencies have other rules.
In 99%+ of cases in the past those rules made no real difference because everyone recognized everyone else's marriage. But now those different rules will be evident.
I don't believe that is true, otherwise us here in California would still be discriminated against!!!

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

#12 Jun 25, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Wait until President Hillary nominates former President Obama to replace Kennedy or Scalia on the SCOTUS!
ROFL !

:)

And seriously, The Obamaniac was NEVER a "Constitutional Law Professor"

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#13 Jun 25, 2013
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't believe that is true, otherwise us here in California would still be discriminated against!!!
Not if as expected they toss Prop 8 as well.

I don't know how it's going to work out- no one really does- and until we see the language of the SCOTUS ruling on DOMA, it's all speculation.

I DO know that without an unequivocal statement from the SCOTUS, the anti-gays will immediately sue to prevent federal recognition of married same-sex couples residing in states which don't recognize/perform such marriages. All it takes is one federal judge in one of those states to agree with them and then we're tied up in court again for another 5 years.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#14 Jun 25, 2013
Europa Report wrote:
<quoted text>
ROFL !
:)
And seriously, The Obamaniac was NEVER a "Constitutional Law Professor"
Roll all you want, but we'll have the last laugh when Obama takes his oath as the newest SCOTUS justice.

Since you're so fond of inane trivia, you should know it's happened before. Hint, he was also the largest President we've ever had.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#15 Jun 25, 2013
Europa Report wrote:
<quoted text>
ROFL !
:)
And seriously, The Obamaniac was NEVER a "Constitutional Law Professor"
And can you imagine any better way for the Dems to irritate the GOPasaurs, especially if Obama was to replace Scalia!!

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#16 Jun 25, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Not if as expected they toss Prop 8 as well.
I don't know how it's going to work out- no one really does- and until we see the language of the SCOTUS ruling on DOMA, it's all speculation.
I DO know that without an unequivocal statement from the SCOTUS, the anti-gays will immediately sue to prevent federal recognition of married same-sex couples residing in states which don't recognize/perform such marriages. All it takes is one federal judge in one of those states to agree with them and then we're tied up in court again for another 5 years.
True......but I don't believe these cases will be tied up again.....not without good cause and there isn't one!!!

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#17 Jun 25, 2013
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
True......but I don't believe these cases will be tied up again.....not without good cause and there isn't one!!!
These case won't be, but the anti-gays will be filing new cases as soon as the rulings are out.

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

#19 Jun 25, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
These case won't be, but the anti-gays will be filing new cases as soon as the rulings are out.
Then we should start a BIG PUSH to FULLY HOMOSEXUALIZE our enemies !

We can start with massive mailings to them of Johnny Mathis albums, Bette Midler posters, and "101 Show Tunes Everyone Should Know !"

Our NEW motto !: Resistance is futile.....

:)

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

#20 Jun 25, 2013
btw, in addition to Section 3, Section 2 is also CLEARLY unconstitutional as it also obviously violates the "Full faith and Credit" clause of the U.S. Constitution.

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#21 Jun 25, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
These case won't be, but the anti-gays will be filing new cases as soon as the rulings are out.
Okay, then what's the point? Why hold our breathes if NOTHING is going to change and in 25 days the anti-gay bigots are going to file some new challenge!!!

I just don't get it Sheeple? Why don't you explain it to me!!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

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.

Iowa Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
looking for guys on skype Fri babygirlx19 1
Your 2 Cents' Worth Submit brief anonymous comm... (Jul '09) Dec 24 50312 Senior 167
bored on skype? Dec 18 xxxbadgirlsexxx 1
Polls favor GOP Senate takeover Dec 17 Swedenforever 3
Gingrich: Mitt Romney is a liar (Jan '12) Dec 10 swedenforever 65
Night Cleaning Jobs Dec 6 Jason 1
Steve King is a close ally of Ted Cruz, and tha... Dec 3 wild child 1
More from around the web