View Poll Results: How will SCOTUS rule?

Voters
60. You may not vote on this poll
  • States can ban SSM and not recognize them from other states

    2 3.33%
  • States can ban SSM but have to recognize them from other states

    8 13.33%
  • States cannot ban SSM but do not have to recognize them from other states

    1 1.67%
  • States cannot ban SSM and have to recognize them from other states

    45 75.00%
  • No ruling, lack of standing

    1 1.67%
  • Something else

    3 5.00%
Page 6 of 18 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 178

Thread: Crystal Ball Time: SCOTUS and SSM

  1. #51
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 02:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    26,435

    Re: Crystal Ball Time: SCOTUS and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by d0gbreath View Post
    What if the civil unions were in fact legally identical to marriage?
    Even if we ignore that 'separate but equal' has been ruled unConstitutional, why on Earth would anyone want 'bigger' govt and more bureaucracy by creating yet another classification to be administered? More paperwork, more cost, more agencies of oversite, more time invested by IRS and other federal agencies that administer taxes, benefits, etc?

    Kinda the opposite of what conservatives claim to want and it also seems that it's mostly conservatives objecting to SSM.
    Last edited by Lursa; 04-28-15 at 12:02 PM.
    "Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free."

    "No, you'll be *a* judge of that, just like everyone else who reads it."
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  2. #52
    Liberal Fascist For Life!

    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:38 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    88,356
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Crystal Ball Time: SCOTUS and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by d0gbreath View Post
    What if the civil unions were in fact legally identical to marriage?
    Two issues with that.

    1: so far no civil union has actually been identical to marriage.
    2: if it is identical to marriage, then it is marriage. Calling it something else is not going to change that.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  3. #53
    Professor

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:47 PM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    1,519

    Re: Crystal Ball Time: SCOTUS and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Two issues with that.

    1: so far no civil union has actually been identical to marriage.
    2: if it is identical to marriage, then it is marriage. Calling it something else is not going to change that.
    If civil union is made equal to marriage in everything but name, and the distiction is something the religious opposition to SSM can tolerate if not support, would that be a good outcome or a bad one?

  4. #54
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,030

    Re: Crystal Ball Time: SCOTUS and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by CycloneWanderer View Post
    If civil union is made equal to marriage in everything but name, and the distiction is something the religious opposition to SSM can tolerate if not support, would that be a good outcome or a bad one?

    All people go to the government and get a Civil Union.

    Religious people go to a religious organization and get a Religious Marriage. But be aware there are a lot of religoius organizations (and the number is growing) that will already religiously marry people of the same-sex so they still get to use the word "marriage" since they are married in a Church (Synagogue, Temple, etc.).




    OK. That's fine.


    >>>>

  5. #55
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    41,525

    Re: Crystal Ball Time: SCOTUS and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by d0gbreath View Post
    SCOTUS will vote in accordance with option #4.

    They will however, use the verbiage 'Civil Union' in order to placate the bigots.
    that will never happen since that cant be done simply by saying "civil unions" . . that would be completely moronic, a waste of time and cause all types of problems . . . .
    what would replace civil unions?
    also the bigots dont need placated to just like we didnt placate to them with minority and woman's rights.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  6. #56
    Liberal Fascist For Life!

    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:38 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    88,356
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Crystal Ball Time: SCOTUS and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by CycloneWanderer View Post
    If civil union is made equal to marriage in everything but name, and the distiction is something the religious opposition to SSM can tolerate if not support, would that be a good outcome or a bad one?
    A bad one. Creating artificial divides just to appease a few nuts is not ever a good solution.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  7. #57
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    41,525

    Re: Crystal Ball Time: SCOTUS and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by CycloneWanderer View Post
    If civil union is made equal to marriage in everything but name, and the distiction is something the religious opposition to SSM can tolerate if not support, would that be a good outcome or a bad one?
    was it good or bad when blacks had to use thier own water fountains etc? bad of course

    bad because it undermines peoples rights, is a waste of time and money, would be totally changing the system how it is and simply can't be done in reality.
    the opposition no matter who they are dont matter to equal rights, thier support isnt needed nor does it matter
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  8. #58
    Temp Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles area
    Last Seen
    01-19-17 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,270

    Re: Crystal Ball Time: SCOTUS and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    SCOTUSBLOG is suggesting that Option #1 is shot.


    From their LiveBlog:



    Which would be Option #2, which I think is the best actual option here.
    I don't see what constitutional basis there would be for requiring a state to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. Article IV, sec. 1 of the Constitution says that "Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state." But that requirement is subject to a condition. The second sentence of this clause says that "the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof."

    That is exactly what Congress did in section two of the Defense of Marriage Act:

    ‘‘No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.’’

    The Supreme Court certainly has no authority to write the second sentence of the Full Faith and Credit Clause out of the Constitution.

  9. #59
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-30-16 @ 05:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,614

    Re: Crystal Ball Time: SCOTUS and SSM

    4 Justices allowing a ban
    4 Justices banning a ban
    Kennedy making the swing vote.
    Be sure to work hard and get lots of overtime. People on welfare want more steaks and free upgrades to smart phones with unlimited data packages.

  10. #60
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    54,904

    Re: Crystal Ball Time: SCOTUS and SSM

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    I don't see what constitutional basis there would be for requiring a state to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. Article IV, sec. 1 of the Constitution says that "Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state." But that requirement is subject to a condition. The second sentence of this clause says that "the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof."

    That is exactly what Congress did in section two of the Defense of Marriage Act:

    ‘‘No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.’’

    The Supreme Court certainly has no authority to write the second sentence of the Full Faith and Credit Clause out of the Constitution.
    That portion of DOMA was overthrown in Windsor.
    Worth noting, Democrats: President Trump will have a Pen and a Phone. #Precedent.

Page 6 of 18 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... 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
  •