View Poll Results: Does the Full Faith and Credit Clause mean that an Anti-SSM state must recognize a SS

Voters
32. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, it is unconstitutional for a state to withhold recognition of a SSM as per the FFaC clause

    16 50.00%
  • No, it is not unconstitutional for a state to withhold recognition of a SSM as per the FFaC clause

    7 21.88%
  • Other/Don't know

    9 28.13%
Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 136

Thread: SSM and the Full Faith and Credit Clause

  1. #41
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: SSM and the Full Faith and Credit Clause

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    What a fascinating argument to make - so you disagree with the recent supreme court ruling and find that the Federal Government does, in fact, have the right to impose its' definition of marriage on the States?
    Fascinating? You must be easy to fascinate.


    I meant what I typed - how the feds/states work it out is up to them.

    If the feds make same sex marriage nationally recognized, then whatever the states think is irrelevant.

  2. #42
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: SSM and the Full Faith and Credit Clause

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    So if I was gay, I should grab a man and marriage licenses in Maryland and a Concealled Carry Permit and gun in Virginia and move my ass to Illinois while yucking it up.
    Hilarious
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  3. #43
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,620

    Re: SSM and the Full Faith and Credit Clause

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    It's the type of ruling, in my opinion, that would have been wise in the abortion cases early on - allowing the states to move at their own pace. I'm pretty sure they'll all get there eventually, in their own way, but at least then it will be something that is accepted by a majority in a state and not something the majority feels was imposed upon them.
    I recall a war fought on US soil that ended slavery. When was that? I recall rather large riots over completely integrating the South, when was that? I'd say that leaving it to the states to do when 'they are ready' is just another way of saying- never.

    I would remind those who think states can set differing standards for their citizens over marriage isn't comparable to say concealed carry. To be comparable to concealed carry the state would have to set different standards for their citizens within the state, such as age, sex, race, hair color, left or right handed... it isn't just about what YOUR gays can do vs another state, it is what your hetros can do vs your Gays.

    The FF&C clause may not be the best route, however when the Supreme Court let stand the lower court ruling that prop 8 was unconstitutional that is the beginning of the end for all other state's Constitutional amendments and laws against same sex marriage.

    May take a series of lower court rulings, may take the Supreme Court stepping up and declaring such state amendments and laws unconstitutional...

    But the last thing that will effect change is letting the states take their time...

  4. #44
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,107

    Re: SSM and the Full Faith and Credit Clause

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    Fascinating? You must be easy to fascinate.

    I meant what I typed - how the feds/states work it out is up to them.

    If the feds make same sex marriage nationally recognized, then whatever the states think is irrelevant.
    I find it fascinating because usually you are a libertarian-esque fellow; but here you are calling for an expanded role for the central government in determining social policy.

  5. #45
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,189

    Re: SSM and the Full Faith and Credit Clause

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    I recall a war fought on US soil that ended slavery. When was that? I recall rather large riots over completely integrating the South, when was that? I'd say that leaving it to the states to do when 'they are ready' is just another way of saying- never.

    I would remind those who think states can set differing standards for their citizens over marriage isn't comparable to say concealed carry. To be comparable to concealed carry the state would have to set different standards for their citizens within the state, such as age, sex, race, hair color, left or right handed... it isn't just about what YOUR gays can do vs another state, it is what your hetros can do vs your Gays.

    The FF&C clause may not be the best route, however when the Supreme Court let stand the lower court ruling that prop 8 was unconstitutional that is the beginning of the end for all other state's Constitutional amendments and laws against same sex marriage.

    May take a series of lower court rulings, may take the Supreme Court stepping up and declaring such state amendments and laws unconstitutional...

    But the last thing that will effect change is letting the states take their time...
    Don't count on the Supreme Court making such a decision and vacating state constitutions - Ginsburg, perhaps the most liberal of all justices in my lifetime, has clearly stated that she believes the court erred in Roe v Wade because it out-paced the movement of the country as it related to abortion - I don't see her making the same mistake with SSM - I have nothing against SSM that I don't have against all state sanctioned marriage - I just don't see this court being so activist as you suggest.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  6. #46
    Sage
    polgara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,348

    Re: SSM and the Full Faith and Credit Clause

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Don't count on the Supreme Court making such a decision and vacating state constitutions - Ginsburg, perhaps the most liberal of all justices in my lifetime, has clearly stated that she believes the court erred in Roe v Wade because it out-paced the movement of the country as it related to abortion - I don't see her making the same mistake with SSM - I have nothing against SSM that I don't have against all state sanctioned marriage - I just don't see this court being so activist as you suggest.
    Good afternoon, CJ.

    I am going to wait and see what happens if the balance of conservatives and liberals changes, since it appears that party interpretation is the key! As an example, "infringed" versus some other word.

  7. #47
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,189

    Re: SSM and the Full Faith and Credit Clause

    Quote Originally Posted by polgara View Post
    Good afternoon, CJ.

    I am going to wait and see what happens if the balance of conservatives and liberals changes, since it appears that party interpretation is the key! As an example, "infringed" versus some other word.
    Good afternoon Lady P - still very humid up here but we could get a break tonight - hope you're doing okay and on your way home soon - take care
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  8. #48
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,620

    Re: SSM and the Full Faith and Credit Clause

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Don't count on the Supreme Court making such a decision and vacating state constitutions - Ginsburg, perhaps the most liberal of all justices in my lifetime, has clearly stated that she believes the court erred in Roe v Wade because it out-paced the movement of the country as it related to abortion - I don't see her making the same mistake with SSM - I have nothing against SSM that I don't have against all state sanctioned marriage - I just don't see this court being so activist as you suggest.
    You ignore the thrust of my response to the 'at their own pace' comment. For a century AFTER the end of our Civil War the states proceeded at their own pace and only at FEDERAL insistence did the integration achieve anything like equal rights.

    It probably doesn't need to be done as a FF&C clause, but then again this doesn't lend itself to the opponents shouting MURDER and waving aborted fetus pictures around. Not near the emotional issue... all wailing done by a small highly emotional group of mourners on the interwebz aside.

    I can see a FF&C showdown OR a roll call of states having their state constitution amendments tossed out until a tipping point is reached and then the Supreme Court has had enough and issues the final decision.

    Now I can see the Supreme Court vacating ANY amendment to ANY constitution that it sees as unconstitutional no matter the timing. They will not vacate the entire state constitution, just the one amendment.

    As far as activist goes- doing their job isn't activist, of late they seem intent on tearing the dirty bandaid off a millimeter at a time instead of one swift pull.

    But my point was allowing the states to proceed at their own sweet time is code for some never getting around to it as Birmingham is in my memory.

  9. #49
    Sage
    polgara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,348

    Re: SSM and the Full Faith and Credit Clause

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Good afternoon Lady P - still very humid up here but we could get a break tonight - hope you're doing okay and on your way home soon - take care
    It's predicted to be 99 degrees tomorrow, so if I do venture outdoors, it will be at 0500 until 0515...long enough for the dogs to get their business done! It's what I have been doing for the past week to let my daughter sleep in a bit before she has to go to work! :

  10. #50
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,189

    Re: SSM and the Full Faith and Credit Clause

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    You ignore the thrust of my response to the 'at their own pace' comment. For a century AFTER the end of our Civil War the states proceeded at their own pace and only at FEDERAL insistence did the integration achieve anything like equal rights.

    It probably doesn't need to be done as a FF&C clause, but then again this doesn't lend itself to the opponents shouting MURDER and waving aborted fetus pictures around. Not near the emotional issue... all wailing done by a small highly emotional group of mourners on the interwebz aside.

    I can see a FF&C showdown OR a roll call of states having their state constitution amendments tossed out until a tipping point is reached and then the Supreme Court has had enough and issues the final decision.

    Now I can see the Supreme Court vacating ANY amendment to ANY constitution that it sees as unconstitutional no matter the timing. They will not vacate the entire state constitution, just the one amendment.

    As far as activist goes- doing their job isn't activist, of late they seem intent on tearing the dirty bandaid off a millimeter at a time instead of one swift pull.

    But my point was allowing the states to proceed at their own sweet time is code for some never getting around to it as Birmingham is in my memory.
    Sorry, I didn't ignore the "thrust" of your argument - I appreciate it - I simply point out that it is better to have society grow to accept something willingly, or have younger people take over from older generations and provide greater acceptance, than it is to force something on people. It happened with abortion, and it's been argued, by Ginsburg as well, that had they not forced it, as they did, it may have evolved with greater acceptance over time. Obamacare is similar - because people feel it was forced upon them, they are resistant, even if parts of it are very desireable.

    In-your-face dictation of how you will act is never the best way to build consensus. I'll tell you, quite plainly, that had same sex marriage advocates agreed to accept a different term for their unions - such as the term "union" - provided that the government acrued to same sex unions the exact same legal status, benefits and recognition as heterosexual marriage, there would have been far greater acceptance than there already is. For whatever reason, SSM advocates insisted upon co-opting and pushing the "marriage" part of same sex unions for what appears to many as just political reasons. That's not a way to draw people to your cause and make friends.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •