What is new on the Gay Marriage front?

[TX-Beau]

Scalia will only be 88 when a Republican replaces Hillary in 2024. He will not retire before then.

Then someone will have to toss him back into the fiery chasm from whence he came...

 

[jbrown329]

Scalia needs a cork and a pound of Ex-lax disguised as fine chocolate.

 

[scream4ever]

Scalia will only be 88 when a Republican replaces Hillary in 2024. He will not retire before then.

True, but he does appear to be in declining health, even just slightly, which will really start to pick up as he heads into his 80's.

 

[T-Rexx]

^ Racist bigots are like old nuns. They never die.

 

[scream4ever]

Regardless, I expect Hillary Clinton will replace Kennedy and/or Scalia by the time she leaves office.

 

[Jacquemar]

An Alabama judge has halted the issuing of same-sex marriage licenses arguing that the Supreme Court's decision is at odds with earlier opinions made by the state's highest court:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/al...es-should-not-be-issued/ar-AAgrBA8?li=BBnb7Kz

Isn't it sort of late in the game for these kinds of shenanigans?

 

[opinterph]

Isn't it sort of late in the game for these kinds of shenanigans?

Chief Justice Roy Moore is apparently making one last ditch effort to save “the institution of God” – at least in the State of Alabama.

Central to Moore’s reasoning is the assertion that Obergefell only applied to the four states in that case, namely Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee.

The Quixotic Adventures of Roy Moore (The Atlantic)

 

[T-Rexx]

Of course there is no chance Roy Moore can prevail with this nonsense.

I'm guessing that what he is trying to do is to dispell for as long as he can the notion that gay marriage is inevitable and natural. He may believe that if he stalls long enough he may ultimately prevail, at least for a couple of decades.

Obergefell was 5-4. If the next president is Republican, there is a reasonable chance that we will lose gay marriage in the USA, at least for a little while. Virtually all of the Republican candidates for president have pledged to appoint judges who are anti-gay. A repeal of Obergefell is not beyond question.

 

[jbrown329]

Moore needs a cattle prod up the ass. He wants a theocracy so bad, give him a parachute and shove his ass out of a plane over Iran.

 

[scream4ever]

Of course there is no chance Roy Moore can prevail with this nonsense.

I'm guessing that what he is trying to do is to dispell for as long as he can the notion that gay marriage is inevitable and natural. He may believe that if he stalls long enough he may ultimately prevail, at least for a couple of decades.

Obergefell was 5-4. If the next president is Republican, there is a reasonable chance that we will lose gay marriage in the USA, at least for a little while. Virtually all of the Republican candidates for president have pledged to appoint judges who are anti-gay. A repeal of Obergefell is not beyond question.

Not a chance. Someone would need standing to sue, showing how allowing gay couples to marry hurts them. At the worst, someone like Kim Davis could perhaps win, and thus county clerks could refuse to issue licenses, citing religious beliefs.

 

[frankfrank]

someone like Kim Davis could perhaps win, and thus county clerks could refuse to issue licenses, citing religious beliefs.

If she prevails, the county clerk thing could spread like wildfire. In some cases there may be no available gay-marriage clerks within 150 to 200 miles, or even farther - perhaps affecting ENTIRE states. That would certainly be discrimination.

 

[T-Rexx]

Not a chance. Someone would need standing to sue, showing how allowing gay couples to marry hurts them. At the worst, someone like Kim Davis could perhaps win, and thus county clerks could refuse to issue licenses, citing religious beliefs.

They would find someone.

Some guy who claimed his gay parents abused him, or some company claiming its religion prohibits it from hiring a married gay person or something stupid like that. They would engineer the situation to their need (such as was done in Plessy vs. Ferguson or the Scopes Monkey trial) and appeal it to SCOTUS. We barely won Obergefell and half the SC remains rabidly anti-gay. (I was surprised, for example, at how hateful was Roberts' dissent in Obergefell. It was astoundingly stupid - the sort of thing that will be held up for the next few hundred years as an example of how a supreme's bigotry can interfere with his ability to think logically.)

There remains extraordinary homophobia within SCOTUS. A single new justice could instantly tilt the balance of the court in the opposite direction. And they would be eager to accept any opportunity that presented itself to overturn Obergefell.

 

[scream4ever]

They would find someone.

Some guy who claimed his gay parents abused him, or some company claiming its religion prohibits it from hiring a married gay person or something stupid like that. They would engineer the situation to their need (such as was done in Plessy vs. Ferguson or the Scopes Monkey trial) and appeal it to SCOTUS. We barely won Obergefell and half the SC remains rabidly anti-gay. (I was surprised, for example, at how hateful was Roberts' dissent in Obergefell. It was astoundingly stupid - the sort of thing that will be held up for the next few hundred years as an example of how a supreme's bigotry can interfere with his ability to think logically.)

There remains extraordinary homophobia within SCOTUS. A single new justice could instantly tilt the balance of the court in the opposite direction. And they would be eager to accept any opportunity that presented itself to overturn Obergefell.

It won't be overturned. If you seriously think it ever could, you have very little understanding of American law. For years the Right has tried to overturn Roe v Wade, and while they have succeeded in allowing some limitations, the direct ruling itself has not, and will not be overturned.

 

[jbrown329]

It won't be overturned. If you seriously think it ever could, you have very little understanding of American law. For years the Right has tried to overturn Roe v Wade, and while they have succeeded in allowing some limitations, the direct ruling itself has not, and will not be overturned.

And apparently you don't understand SCOTUS. Put a couple more freaks on the court and see what happens. Obergefell v. Hodges? Gone. Abortion? Gone. Lawrence v. Texas? Gone. Then really watch what happens to voting rights.

 

[T-Rexx]

It won't be overturned. If you seriously think it ever could, you have very little understanding of American law. For years the Right has tried to overturn Roe v Wade, and while they have succeeded in allowing some limitations, the direct ruling itself has not, and will not be overturned.

I agree about Roe v. Wade, but it is quite a different situation. Opinions about Roe v. Wade are not driven by hatred for some minority. While there is certainly some misogyny clouding the issue, you don't have rabidly bigoted justices campaigning against abortion like you do with gay marriage. There is no pro-life equivalent of Roy Moore, for example, ordering an end to all abortions in his state because he hates women.

The other difference is that Republican leaders, for all their talk, do not really want to overturn Roe v. Wade. They understand that that would be a disaster. It is far preferable for them to try to find ways of making abortion difficult, while yet keeping it legal. Every Republican president since Reagan spoke against abortion while campaigning for office. Not one of them even mentioned Roe v. Wade once they occupired the White House. Not a peep. There is no real movement to overturn Roe. But there is quite a substantial movement to overturn Obergefell.

I'm not saying I think they will succeed. Quite the contrary, overturning Obergefell would be quite difficult for Republicans. But it is not inconceivable.

 

[scream4ever]

I agree about Roe v. Wade, but it is quite a different situation. Opinions about Roe v. Wade are not driven by hatred for some minority. While there is certainly some misogyny clouding the issue, you don't have rabidly bigoted justices campaigning against abortion like you do with gay marriage. There is no pro-life equivalent of Roy Moore, for example, ordering an end to all abortions in his state because he hates women.

The other difference is that Republican leaders, for all their talk, do not really want to overturn Roe v. Wade. They understand that that would be a disaster. It is far preferable for them to try to find ways of making abortion difficult, while yet keeping it legal. Every Republican president since Reagan spoke against abortion while campaigning for office. Not one of them even mentioned Roe v. Wade once they occupired the White House. Not a peep. There is no real movement to overturn Roe. But there is quite a substantial movement to overturn Obergefell.

I'm not saying I think they will succeed. Quite the contrary, overturning Obergefell would be quite difficult for Republicans. But it is not inconceivable.

See, view it as the exact opposite. The Republican higher ups don't actually want to overturn Obergefell. They're simply paying lip service to their Christian followers. Only the crazies like Roy Moore and Brian Brown actually think it's plausible. While support for abortion has remained steady over the years, support for gay marriage continues to climb.

 

[kallipolis]

To my surprise even hyper traditional Cyprus has legislated civil partnerships.

http://cyprus-mail.com/2016/01/20/first-civil-partnership-to-be-signed-interest-grows/

I quote:

Two women will be the first to enter into formal civil partnerships in Cyprus on Friday January 29, it emerged on Wednesday.

They applied after the law allowing same-sex unions came into effect on Monday. The ceremony will take place in Nicosia. Another two ceremonies are booked for February.

The civil union law which makes this possible ensures that same-sex couples have the same rights and responsibilities as opposite-sex couples.

 

[kallipolis]

First same sex civil union in Greece authorised by the mayor of Athens:

http://www.ekathimerini.com/205402/...-inks-countrys-first-gay-partnership-contract

I quote:

Athens Mayor Giorgos Kaminis Monday became the first Greek official to sign a same-sex civil partnership agreement following the recent approval of legislation granting homosexual couples almost equal rights to their heterosexual counterparts.

 

[rareboy]

Well done Greece and Cyprus.

 

[rareboy]

They would find someone.

Some guy who claimed his gay parents abused him, or some company claiming its religion prohibits it from hiring a married gay person or something stupid like that. They would engineer the situation to their need (such as was done in Plessy vs. Ferguson or the Scopes Monkey trial) and appeal it to SCOTUS. We barely won Obergefell and half the SC remains rabidly anti-gay. (I was surprised, for example, at how hateful was Roberts' dissent in Obergefell. It was astoundingly stupid - the sort of thing that will be held up for the next few hundred years as an example of how a supreme's bigotry can interfere with his ability to think logically.)

There remains extraordinary homophobia within SCOTUS. A single new justice could instantly tilt the balance of the court in the opposite direction. And they would be eager to accept any opportunity that presented itself to overturn Obergefell.

Some things can't be overturned.

And the rights and protection of marriage would be one of them.

It is one thing to withhold a right from people....another thing to strip them of these rights they have been granted by the Supreme Court. Likewise, why Citizens United and Roe v. Wade will never be overturned.

Even the most conservative court knows that this could never happen, because it would be open season on all equal rights.