Utah's Marriage Fight Continues

[scream4ever]

The sum total of what we know is that Utah advanced laughably absurd arguments against gay marriage, and the Supreme Court found in Utah's favor. Period.

Anything beyond that is just speculation.

If SCOTUS had wanted us to understand something other than that it agreed with Utah, it could have issued an explanation of its ruling. It did not.

You're grasping at straws. One thing about the Supreme Court is that you can never take anything at face value.

 

[T-Rexx]

^ What we KNOW is that Utah has advanced laughably absurd arguments against gay marriage and SCOTUS has ruled in Utah's favor.

You have extrapolated from this that Kennedy and Sotomayor are ready to "issue a sweeping, 50 state opinion" but that Ginsurg and the rest of the court "decided to punt on the question."

You also concluded that SCOTUS agreed with Utah on the stay in order to conceal from America the fact that they do not agree with Utah on gay marriage.

I don't think I'm the one "grasping at straws" here.

 

[Alnitak]

Frustrating as it is, it is probably true that delays will only work in our favor. The direction of public opinion has been inexorably and rapidly in favor of gay marriage. Evidence of the benefit of gay marriage to American society only accumulates. These haters are fighting an uphill battle. And the more they delay, the steeper becomes the gradient against which they must labor.

I suppose, purely from a procedural standpoint, that there is no real need to rush oral arguments immediately after briefs. That is, it really doesn't matter if the hearing is set for March or May. The next term of the high court doesn't start until October and it takes appeals for several months after that. Unless you are considering the persuasiveness angle.

It's sort of a chicken-and-egg game.

You're right that time is always on our side, i.e. the longer we wait the more favorable the environment becomes. However, we need wins to represent that attitude as well. Consider that a big 10th Circuit win would have a major impact on districts in other circuits, and that the weight of persuasion from an appeals court top to bottom just has more power than from bottom to top. So it may work in our benefit to have the court of appeals rule than another district.

In any event, there are 25 cases in various stages of maturity and there are plenty more district judges to influence. Of the seven cases filed since October, only one - West Virginia - has made any real progress so far (I know this because I'm on it like white on rice). Several of the others have outstanding motions for summary judgment or immediate relief. They could be waiting to see what the court of appeals does, but I agree that having a bit more time opens up the opportunity for more districts to rule in our favor and influence the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

We're talking about a delay of two months, and granted seeing as the progress has been that rapid and unpredictable, that actually could make a difference, or maybe the other way around

 

[scream4ever]

I suppose, purely from a procedural standpoint, that there is no real need to rush oral arguments immediately after briefs. That is, it really doesn't matter if the hearing is set for March or May. The next term of the high court doesn't start until October and it takes appeals for several months after that. Unless you are considering the persuasiveness angle.

That is of course assuming the ruling from the appeals court is stayed, which I would say is not at all guaranteed. Remember the Supreme Court order of the stay said it would dissolve upon disposition from the 10th Circuit, and not the Supreme Court.

 

[Kulindahr]

That is of course assuming the ruling from the appeals court is stayed, which I would say is not at all guaranteed. Remember the Supreme Court order of the stay said it would dissolve upon disposition from the 10th Circuit, and not the Supreme Court.

In other words, they're going to let the Tenth do its thing and then ignore the case?

 

[scream4ever]

In other words, they're going to let the Tenth do its thing and then ignore the case?

That's the impression I got from it but we can't know for sure.

 

[Alnitak]

In other words, they're going to let the Tenth do its thing and then ignore the case?

That's a distinct possibility, but like scream said nobody really knows. This is all fluff we fill in the vacuum, you know like the regular crap you hear from sports commentators.

There would have to be two reasons for both camps to refuse to hear this case. I suppose if the right wing thinks Kennedy and Ginsburg are ready to issue the Big Tamale if their hands are forced then yeah the court will refuse it. However, that would leave the 10th and 8th at odds with each other. Add in the 9th, which will probably rule by summer as well, and it really looks like a case, some case, will be taken up in October.

 

[Ninja108]

That's a distinct possibility, but like scream said nobody really knows. This is all fluff we fill in the vacuum, you know like the regular crap you hear from sports commentators.

There would have to be two reasons for both camps to refuse to hear this case. I suppose if the right wing thinks Kennedy and Ginsburg are ready to issue the Big Tamale if their hands are forced then yeah the court will refuse it. However, that would leave the 10th and 8th at odds with each other. Add in the 9th, which will probably rule by summer as well, and it really looks like a case, some case, will be taken up in October.

Which is exactly what Scalia predicted would happen. He's an SOB but he is dead on about what these rulings mean equality wise,even though he hates it.

 

[Kulindahr]

Which is exactly what Scalia predicted would happen. He's an SOB but he is dead on about what these rulings mean equality wise,even though he hates it.

I think Scalia (and Thomas) would prefer to wait until every single circuit has a case wanting to go to SCOTUS, to put it off as long as they can.

 

[Alnitak]

smh

Carolyn Lee, 65, of the small northern Utah city of Roy, hasn't changed her mind. The images of couples celebrating outraged her. "I'm so sick and tired of every dang TV channel you look at you have to see a girl and a girl kissing and boy and boy kissing," Lee said in an interview, adding she couldn't believe there were that many gays and lesbians in the state. "I think it's a big publicity stunt."

Delicate path for gay marriage in red states

Someone who probably has never left her home town.

 

[Kulindahr]

I got a kick out of this:

"There's a widespread sense of surprise and umbrage that one judge could do that," said Paul Mero of the Sutherland Institute, a conservative think tank in Utah. "I'm disappointed that any single lower court judge thinks they can overrule millennia of custom, tradition and law."

"Millennia of tradition". huh? If they want to honor millennia of tradition, they should go for a law allowing men to buy wives.

 

[Alnitak]

I got a kick out of this:



"Millennia of tradition". huh? If they want to honor millennia of tradition, they should go for a law allowing men to buy wives.

The opening line of the Talmud tractate kedoshim literally says "how does one buy a wife"

 

[Ninja108]

Exactly,if people want to go back to traditional marriage,they need to start putting their daughters up for sale again.

 

[Kulindahr]

The opening line of the Talmud tractate kedoshim literally says "how does one buy a wife"

Bingo.

Among a small set of my ancestors, if a man couldn't get a wife in his own tribe/settlement, he could go kidnap one from another tribe.

I can imagine the text messages...

GTG Wyf 2 kdnp CU L8r

 

[xbuzzerx]

Bingo.

Among a small set of my ancestors, if a man couldn't get a wife in his own tribe/settlement, he could go kidnap one from another tribe.

I can imagine the text messages...

GTG Wyf 2 kdnp CU L8r

You barbarians! Ours would meet up with 2 different tribes once a year and people would pick dates/mates from outside of the tribe.

 

[Alnitak]

Bingo.

Among a small set of my ancestors, if a man couldn't get a wife in his own tribe/settlement, he could go kidnap one from another tribe.

I can imagine the text messages...

GTG Wyf 2 kdnp CU L8r

Well it was a paraphrase from my memory. This is a good translation:

A WIFE is acquired in three ways, and she can get her freedom in two ways. She is acquired through money, through a deed, or through sexual intimacy.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/bata/bata13.htm

A deed, well the text says "shtar," which literally means a bill of sale, and in this case a wife acquired through slavery But the tractate goes on to say that the smallest legally meaningful amount you can buy a wife for is a perutah or the value of a pomegranate.

 

[Kulindahr]

You barbarians! Ours would meet up with 2 different tribes once a year and people would pick dates/mates from outside of the tribe.

From some of my ancestors, that was also the case.

I have a sister-in-law who has ancestors among whom if a man couldn't find a wife from his tribe, he would actually go seek among other tribes, and if he found a wife their, he would join her tribe and marry her.

Interesting ways our ancestors had to keep the gene pool from stagnating.

 

[Alnitak]

The ACLU has filed Evans v. Utah in state court demanding recognition of the 1300 marriages that took place before the stay.

 

[xbuzzerx]

From some of my ancestors, that was also the case.

I have a sister-in-law who has ancestors among whom if a man couldn't find a wife from his tribe, he would actually go seek among other tribes, and if he found a wife their, he would join her tribe and marry her.

Interesting ways our ancestors had to keep the gene pool from stagnating.

Just an interesting side note to this Kulindahr, the Mongols at the time of Genghis Khan very commonly "got wives" through raids, but what was interesting about it was wives would often "change husbands" several times throughout their life, just depending on which local tribe happened to be stronger or doing more raiding at the time, and the new husband would always accept any/all children and pregnancies that came along with the wife, even if she was already pregnant at the time he took her, and it was not polite or acceptable to raise any question about paternity. Even Genghis Khan's oldest son was thought to be conceived at a period of time in which his wife had been temporarily kidnapped by another tribe.

 

[Kulindahr]

Just an interesting side note to this Kulindahr, the Mongols at the time of Genghis Khan very commonly "got wives" through raids, but what was interesting about it was wives would often "change husbands" several times throughout their life, just depending on which local tribe happened to be stronger or doing more raiding at the time, and the new husband would always accept any/all children and pregnancies that came along with the wife, even if she was already pregnant at the time he took her, and it was not polite or acceptable to raise any question about paternity. Even Genghis Khan's oldest son was thought to be conceived at a period of time in which his wife had been temporarily kidnapped by another tribe.

I'd forgotten that!

They're not the weirdest, though -- I don't remember even which continent it was on, but in anthro we looked at a culture where if a wife was dissatisfied with her husband she could announce she was for sale. If she got a bid she found acceptable, the price was split evenly with the now-ex-husband! The money she got was hers entirely, not the property of the new husband.

I guess you could tell how well men treat their wives by how much of the wealth was in the hands of the women.