• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Breaking: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

I make 5 times what she makes, I'm sure I'd be strapped with alimony

Then that is your problem. Of course, if you go into your marriage expecting to eventually pay alimony, then it is likely that you don't have too much confidence in the marriage to begin with.
 
Dood..did you just read what you said?

Come on, man. Step back. Breathe. If THAT is how you define the positives and negatives of 'marriage' then you cant POSSIBLY put that on 'gay marriage'. And if we are being honest...you probably would feel better with a blanket apology to people on this forum for letting your emotions get the better of you. Its not personal. Dont make it personal. Dont take it personally.

I've been married 33 years. Its been a battle but its also been fricken awesome. Never once has divorce come up as a possibility and the last thing ever on my mind would be about the negative financial aspect of separation and divorce. Dont tlet those things cloud your opinion on what is and always will be a powerful and beautiful thing.


These people are on here gloating and rubbing it in...they'll never get an apology from me.

Marriage certificates are a relic of yesteryear. Over half of married couples divorce. To not prepare for the possibility is foolish
 
Maybe. From what I hear though those are hardly ever valid

You heard wrong. Good lawyers make sure it's valid. That's what I pay them for.To give me sound legal advice.
 
Dont be silly. I am accepting law. I am citing the justices emotional response. And you are somehow shtting yourself over that fact.

They used flowery language, yes. That happens.

But the legal argument is sound. No state interest exists in barring a same-sex couple from signing a legal contract and therefore the equal protection challenge is upheld.

If you think emotion is the basis for their argument, all you have to do is prove their argument wrong with some sort of unbiased fact.
 
Don't see where, or why, they would have a valid argument against polygamy and close relation. Probably will start to see those lawsuits in the next few months.

There have already been cases to argue these types of issues and, in fact, the Supreme Court very recently refused to review (and thus upheld) a State Supreme Court decision which denied a polygamist challenge.
 
A church that doesn't believe in same-sex marriage will be forced to perform the ceremony OR risk being sued. I don't know of any churches that are against real marriage.

I'm all for a traditional "Two-parent household" of course. Two mommies or two daddys is just creepy and does have some negative effect on the child. Growing Up With Two Moms: The Untold Children

Church's are not required to marry anyone.
 
Says the guy holding up a right-wing, biased study, as the only valid information in the world on the subject.

It was more of a story about a woman who had two "moms" and how it negatively impacted her life.
 
Then that is your problem. Of course, if you go into your marriage expecting to eventually pay alimony, then it is likely that you don't have too much confidence in the marriage to begin with.

Over half of marriages end in divorce. It would be foolish not to consider the possibility
 
There have already been cases to argue these types of issues and, in fact, the Supreme Court very recently refused to review (and thus upheld) a State Supreme Court decision which denied a polygamist challenge.

Now they have a majority opinion from the SCOTUS as leverage to re-argue at the lower levels.
 
These people are on here gloating and rubbing it in...they'll never get an apology from me.

Do you understand why some people are gloating, though? This has been one of the biggest legal hurdles for gay people in decades. It has been a long, tiring, demoralizing, and expensive fight. And, in the end, gay people won. Are you really that surprised that some people are gloating and rubbing it in the faces of the bigoted crowd?

You may not like the decision, and that's fine. At the end of the day, this decision does nothing to you but get you emotionally upset. Your life does not change one iota, and if you claim otherwise then you are just lying.
 
Of course you're right, but this is just one more knock against marriage. Marriage favors the woman anyway, the justice system has already taken divorce law to where your wife can cheat on you, if you divorce her, she gets HALF.

I don't really want to get saddled with that level of financial risk. This decision today just zaps whatever there was about marriage that was pure or worth pursuing anyway....because there is no logical reason for a well off man to marry, the only reason would have been emotional or traditional. Well, now those reasons are finito as well

Its not a knock against marriage.

It is a victory for love. Love wins. You can still marry any woman you want, you can still get married in a church, or you can get married at Chrurch's Fried Chicken if that is your wish. It is about love. Don't be hating on love.
 
It was more of a story about a woman who had two "moms" and how it negatively impacted her life.

But it's right wing, so therefore must be invalid since it's biased. Oh...wait...that only applies to the left, correct? :roll:
 
No.

This is you trying to rationalize that your position on this subject and abortion, the two things you are most vocal about is based on anything but pure, unadulterated hatred and anger.

You're full of it.

I barely touch the topic of "gay marriage." When I do, I have always stated that I don't think the state should discriminate against anyone and that I don't think the state should be issuing licenses at all.

I always talk about the rule of law and respecting the Constitution.

On the other issue, you've made it plain that you're the one driven by hate.

Literally nothing in this stupid lying rant of yours reflects reality, which is typical.
 
Church's are not required to marry anyone.

Ok..perhaps I worded it in a way you didn't understand. Churches who perform traditional marriages will be sued if they refuse to marry same-sex couples. IMHO. We will have to wait and see what happens.
 
Here's a list of all the heterosexual marriages affected by todays ruling:














Carry on.
 
So does this mean that polygamy is now legal too?


Tim-
Tim, it's *always* been legal. There's always been a fundamental right to polygamy. We're just waiting for the right five justices to come along and pull it of their asses, where it's been hiding all this time.
 
Now they have a majority opinion from the SCOTUS as leverage to re-argue at the lower levels.

Ok, if you want to try and find the language from this case which can be used to re-argue the lower court cases, I will look into the language. Otherwise, I think you are just trying to invent bad facts.
 
Moderator's Warning:
All right folks, settle down. Some Mod action has already been required, and more will follow if needed. Let's not get personal with this stuff, avoid personal derogatory remarks and be aware that "excessive celebration" could cross into baiting if it gets too gloaty. In short, behave.
 
Ok..perhaps I worded it in a way you didn't understand. Churches who perform traditional marriages will be sued if they refuse to marry same-sex couples. IMHO. We will have to wait and see what happens.

Just like all the Catholic churches who refuse to perform Muslim weddings, right?
 
But it's right wing, so therefore must be invalid since it's biased. Oh...wait...that only applies to the left, correct? :roll:

To be quite honest, I've seen FAR more lying and spinning coming from the MSM and the left than from Conservative sources. But that's a topic for another forum. ;)
 
Good Lord folks. Marriage is a comittment to forming a new family with another person. It is an incredible emotional, physical, social, and financial journey. Why would anyone want to get married if you are not ready for that commitment?
 
Ok..perhaps I worded it in a way you didn't understand. Churches who perform traditional marriages will be sued if they refuse to marry same-sex couples.

Like all the ones that haven't already?
 
Back
Top Bottom