Supreme Court and ssm

[wigginhall]

Those who have an interest in the US will note that the Supreme Court has ruled that same sex marriage is lawful in all 50 states, and cannot be barred.   Up to yesterday, it was lawful in 37 states, but now the barring of it is declared unconstitutional.  Interesting comment by Judge Kennedy:

“That is not to say the right to marry is less meaningful for those who do not or cannot have children,” writes Kennedy, after pointing out the advantages for children of same-sex couples. “An ability, desire, or promise to procreate is not and has not been a prerequisite for a valid marriage in any State.”

Also, in a  reply to those arguments citing tradition:

“The right to marry is fundamental as a matter of history and tradition, but rights come not from ancient sources,” writes Kennedy. “They rise, too, from a better informed understanding of how constitutional imperatives define a liberty that remains urgent in our own era.”

Well, as we say in Oldham: yay.

[floo]

Jolly good.

[wigginhall]

There's gonna be some hard partying tonight in Tallahassee, and points west, well, some parts thereof.   We're gonna have a good time, it's gonna be a rock 'n' roll night!

[Humph Warden Bennett]

Those who have an interest in the US will note that the Supreme Court has ruled that same sex marriage is lawful in all 50 states, and cannot be barred.   Up to yesterday, it was lawful in 37 states, but now the barring of it is declared unconstitutional.  Interesting comment by Judge Kennedy:

“That is not to say the right to marry is less meaningful for those who do not or cannot have children,” writes Kennedy, after pointing out the advantages for children of same-sex couples. “An ability, desire, or promise to procreate is not and has not been a prerequisite for a valid marriage in any State.”

Also, in a  reply to those arguments citing tradition:

“The right to marry is fundamental as a matter of history and tradition, but rights come not from ancient sources,” writes Kennedy. “They rise, too, from a better informed understanding of how constitutional imperatives define a liberty that remains urgent in our own era.”

Well, as we say in Oldham: yay.

That ruling does not mean that it has to be made legal in all fifty states.

[wigginhall]

I think the final paragraph will become famous:

No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies
the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice,
and family. In forming a marital union, two people become
something greater than once they were. As some of
the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage
embodies a love that may endure even past death. It
would misunderstand these men and women to say they
disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do
respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its
fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned
to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s
oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the
eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Sixth
Circuit is reversed.
It is so ordered.

[wigginhall]

An American friend tells me that weddings are already taking place in county clerk's offices.   But what about bestiality?   Will I be forced to marry a dog now?

[Rhiannon]

A relief to have good news on a day which has generally been characterised by barbarity.

[ekim]

An American friend tells me that weddings are already taking place in county clerk's offices.   But what about bestiality?   Will I be forced to marry a dog now?

Only if you live in Dalmatia.

[Hope]

A relief to have good news on a day which has generally been characterised by barbarity.

Good news, questionable; barbarity, definitely not.

[ad_orientem]

Well, America was founded by Freemasons, so it doesn't surprise me. The only thing that surprises me is that it didn't happen sooner. America always has been a basket case. What vexes me more is that it's happening in Europe, Europe having fallen into apostasy.

[Shaker]

Hooray for apostasy - up with this sort of thing

[Shaker]

A relief to have good news on a day which has generally been characterised by barbarity.

Good news, questionable; barbarity, definitely not.

How is the happiness of so many people "questionable" as good news, exactly?

[Rhiannon]

A relief to have good news on a day which has generally been characterised by barbarity.

Good news, questionable; barbarity, definitely not.

Barbarity= Tunisia, Lyon, Kuwait.

Clicking on the news headlines and seeing all those people with the rainbow flags in the USA and knowing that there at least love has triumphed over religious bigotry is a blessed, blessed relief.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I think the final paragraph will become famous:

No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies
the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice,
and family. In forming a marital union, two people become
something greater than once they were. As some of
the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage
embodies a love that may endure even past death.

No true philosophical naturalist can possibly believe that.

[Shaker]

http://www.rottenecards.com/ecards/Rottenecards_49982641_67nd6hqqkc.png

[jeremyp]

That ruling does not mean that it has to be made legal in all fifty states.

I think it means it is legal in all 50 states.

[torridon]

A relief to have good news on a day which has generally been characterised by barbarity.

Seconded.

I was touched by the dignity of the American black community in response to some throwback shooting up churchgoers.

And now the US under Obama has equalised marriage laws.

On a day when the retards and the head choppers seem to dominate world news, the US quietly takes a step forward; one in the eye for bigots and racists the world over.

[Harrowby Hall]

That ruling does not mean that it has to be made legal in all fifty states.

I think it means it is legal in all 50 states.

I suspect it means that (a) no state can prohibit same-sex marriage and (b) no state can discriminate in any way against a married same-sex couple from outside that state.

[wigginhall]

You will also get stalling going on.  I've heard that in some parts of Texas, there are unexplained delays in arranging same-sex marriages, whereas straight people are sailing through.  I guess it will be ironed out, as with desegregation, which was reluctantly accepted by some.

[Shaker]

Still waiting to hear why Hopalong thinks that this is "questionable" as good news.

I suppose I'll just have to keep reminding him.

[jeremyp]

Still waiting to hear why Hopalong thinks that this is "questionable" as good news.

It's devalued his own marriage.  He's not here because he's out getting a divorce.

[Shaker]

Ahhhhhhh ....

[floo]

A relief to have good news on a day which has generally been characterised by barbarity.

Good news, questionable; barbarity, definitely not.

Why questionable?

[Spud]

after pointing out the advantages for children of same-sex couples.

"Excluding same-sex couples from marriage thus conflicts with a central premise of the right to marry. Without the recognition, stability, and predictability marriage offers, their children suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser. They also suffer the significant material costs of being raised by unmarried parents, relegated through no fault of their own to a more difficult and uncertain family life. The marriage laws at issue here thus harm and humiliate the children of same-sex couples"

The biological parents of the above children will still be unmarried, and so these children will still 'suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser'.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

That ruling does not mean that it has to be made legal in all fifty states.

I think it means it is legal in all 50 states.

I suspect it means that (a) no state can prohibit same-sex marriage and (b) no state can discriminate in any way against a married same-sex couple from outside that state.

My thoughts exactly. This matter is not finished since federal & state laws are so complicated It's worth remembering that some ten years ago two women prison officers successfully argued that for them to be refused to carry out anal inspections of male prisoners amounted to illegal discrimination