What is new on the Gay Marriage front?

[Alnitak]

Okay, so it's June 21st and nothing yet.

It is the long history of this court that it has dragged out every decision on gay marriage to the last minute possible; and it has repeatedly found ways to make its "rulings" on gay marriage not actually say what so obviously needs to be said.

I'm pretty fed up with this bunch.

Last in last out. The marriage cases were taken up at the last minute so it makes sense.

 

[T-Rexx]

Last in last out. The marriage cases were taken up at the last minute so it makes sense.

They were taken up at the last minute because the court refused to take them up within an appropriate time frame.

This decision should have been rendered two years ago.

And yet, here we are. Waiting still.

 

[chrisrobin]

I really don't like comparisons between this issue and abortion. The two debates are really nothing alike. Marriage is a black and white issue; the other is gray, giving plenty of room to fight over nuances and details. That being said, the abortion debate has cost those states and organizations hundreds of millions of dollars.

Actually, I was trying to express how obstinate the evildoers are. (Some of them are still fighting the Civil War.*) We will succeed in spite of the anti-equality faction. When I think of the repeal of Prop. 8 in California, I remain optimistic.

*The War of Northern Aggression?

 

[Alnitak]

They were taken up at the last minute because the court refused to take them up within an appropriate time frame.

This decision should have been rendered two years ago.

And yet, here we are. Waiting still.

The lower courts however turned out these decisions in record time, which was very appreciated.

 

[chrisrobin]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/21/o...ni-gay-marriages-moment.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

Gay Marriage’s Moment

"Now we stand nervously and hopefully on the brink of a milestone. Before the end of June*, a month associated with wedding bells and wedding cake, the Supreme Court will issue a major decision about the right of two men or two women to exchange vows in a manner honored by the government. It may well extend same-sex marriage to all 50 states, making it the law of the land." - Frank Bruni, NYT

Eight days away.

 

[Teddybear71]

So now we enter the week that we have long awaited, and by this time next week, marriage equality will hopefully be law in the US (though I am still not holding my breath). I guess the fight then moves to a different level, trying to ward off or reverse all of the "religious exemption" laws that will be put forward... How incredibly tiresome that there won't be an end to this once and for all.

I guess Winston Churchill was right when he said, "The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative."

 

[hotatlboi]

Last in last out. The marriage cases were taken up at the last minute so it makes sense.

They were taken up at the last minute because the court refused to take them up within an appropriate time frame.

This decision should have been rendered two years ago.

And yet, here we are. Waiting still.

The SCOTUS actually almost always waits until the very end for the most important cases, regardless of when they were taken up.

http://epstein.wustl.edu/research/SupCtTiming.pdf

 

[hotatlboi]

Starting to see more hilariously unhinged behavior from social cons over the last week.

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/06/1...t-himself-on-fire-to-stop-gays-from-marrying/

http://news.yahoo.com/u-evangelicals-draw-battle-lines-against-same-sex-132020495.html

It could be they know their defeat is approaching.

 

[T-Rexx]

The lower courts however turned out these decisions in record time, which was very appreciated.

Yes, the lower courts have given us gay marriage.

The Supreme Court has waited. And waited and waited and waited. When it was given an opportunity to decide, it found a way not to decide. When it was given multiple opportunities to correct this mistake, it chose to ignore them.

I do believe, of course, that SCOTUS will eventually sanction what the lower courts and the nation in general have already decided. And, when that happens, SCOTUS will be lauded as having caused a great improvement in the quality of life in America.

But SCOTUS never really made that decision. It just waited until no other decision would make much sense. That is better, of course, than deciding against gay marriage. And a lot of people will insist that the wait was necessary; that the nation needed time to prepare itself for the shock of acknowledging that certain people have rights. Bullcrap.

SCOTUS would have been more effective in its public role as a mediator of justice by supporting gay marriage early and enthusiastically. As it is, the support is late and subdued - almost an afterthought. You really do get the impression that the court did not want to support this example of social justice, but simply could not find a way around it.

Our public institutions serve us well when they help guide us to ultimately historical understandings of justice. They are terrible when they attempt to guide us to ultimately historical understandings of injustice. The present example of gay marriage is not (yet, at least!) a case of SCOTUS guiding us toward injustice. But it is an example of the court attempting to delay the arrival of obvious justice, and I see that as problematic. This court not only has done a bit to delay the arrival of gay marriage in America, it cannot even bring itself to announce its (presumably positive) decision in a supportive fashion.

I will be overjoyed by a finding in our favor. But I am underwhelmed by the insight and leadership of this court.

 

[T-Rexx]

Starting to see more hilariously unhinged behavior from social cons over the last week.

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/06/1...t-himself-on-fire-to-stop-gays-from-marrying/

http://news.yahoo.com/u-evangelicals-draw-battle-lines-against-same-sex-132020495.html

It could be they know their defeat is approaching.

Yeah, I've noticed that, too.

The religious right seems to have concluded that gay marriage is a done deal, and they have (officially) lost this argument. That scares them, because they know that the world is about to see that marriage equality makes the world a better place, and that their own preachings about how people should act were stupid, wrong, bigoted, and counter-productive.

And if these guys were so wrong about marriage equality, how can we respect their opinions about anything?

They need not worry. Christians used to use their religion as the great justifier of slavery. The south occupied the moral high ground during the Civil War, since the bible is such an unabashedly pro-slavery document. Not only was the south invaded by the north, but the south was nobly defending Jesus against the unwashed hordes. Today, we regard slavery as one of the greatest evils mankind ever perpetrated - and a very, very, very anti-Christian institution. Even though slavery used to be a very Christian institution.

Christians will eventually embrace marriage equality and forget that any Chrisitan ever questioned it as the obviously right thing to do. They will learn to ignore those biblical passages which seem anti-gay, just as they have come to ignore those passages which are pro-slavery. And they will go on listening to pastors who, historically, don't seem to have any clue about how we should go about living our lives.

 

[hotatlboi]

^ And more recently than slavery, southern evangelicals were mostly staunch defenders of Jim Crow.

They have a habit of being wrong on nearly every great expansion of rights in American history.

 

[Kulindahr]

Starting to see more hilariously unhinged behavior from social cons over the last week.

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/06/1...t-himself-on-fire-to-stop-gays-from-marrying/

http://news.yahoo.com/u-evangelicals-draw-battle-lines-against-same-sex-132020495.html

It could be they know their defeat is approaching.

I notice Huckabee and Santorum signed a pledge not to support the ruling. Properly, assuming the Court does the right thing, that will bar them from ever holding federal office. I can't wait to see which state will have the gumption to keep them off their ballots as unqualified to run.

 

[Kulindahr]

Yeah, I've noticed that, too.

They need not worry. Christians used to use their religion as the great justifier of slavery. The south occupied the moral high ground during the Civil War, since the bible is such an unabashedly pro-slavery document. Not only was the south invaded by the north, but the south was nobly defending Jesus against the unwashed hordes. Today, we regard slavery as one of the greatest evils mankind ever perpetrated - and a very, very, very anti-Christian institution. Even though slavery used to be a very Christian institution.

The south hardly "occupied the moral high ground", since it was Christians in the north driving the anti-slavery movement. Christianity was anti-slavery early on, recognizing that it is nigh unto blasphemy to claim ownership of a being made in the image of God. It was entanglement with imperial politics that changed that, with the result that for a millennium and a half the original understanding was squelched.

 

[T-Rexx]

The south hardly "occupied the moral high ground", since it was Christians in the north driving the anti-slavery movement. Christianity was anti-slavery early on, recognizing that it is nigh unto blasphemy to claim ownership of a being made in the image of God. It was entanglement with imperial politics that changed that, with the result that for a millennium and a half the original understanding was squelched.

Not accurate.

While it is true that opposition to slavery came largely from northern Christians, their interpretation of Christianity was NOT traditional. The abolitionists were radical liberals who were calling for a new kind of morality, and a new interpretation of scripture.

The bible is an extremely self-contradictory document, and can therefore be used to justify any behavior whatsoever. Of course both sides invoked the bible in support of their cause. But the south defended the traditional (and, frankly, obvious) biblical support for slavery. Theirs was the moral high ground during the war.

There is not a single passage in the bible condemning slavery. Not one. There are myriad expressions of support. It is well to remember that this is a bronze age document, and expresses a bronze age understanding of morality.

"Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling"

"Tell slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect"

"You may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way."

"If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever."

"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment."

"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property."

"The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it."

Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them.

"[Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God...it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation...it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts."

 

[thewiz]

The decision will likely come this Thursday or next Monday since it didn't come down today.

 

[kallipolis]

The New Covenant assumes a fundamental equality for all humans are created in God’s image ~James 3:9 recognising an even deeper oneness in Christ that transcends human boundaries, and social structures: no Jew or Greek, slave or free, no male and female, as all believers are all “one in Christ Jesus” ~Galatians 3:28; cp. Colossians 3:11.

Jesus' detractors claim that Jesus never said anything about the wrongness of slavery. On the contrary Jesus explicitly opposed every form of oppression in His mission “to proclaim release to the captives … to set free those who are oppressed” ~Luke 4:18 ~Isaiah 61:1. Jesus also addressed prevailing attitudes such as greed, materialism, contentment, and generosity.

The authors of the New Testament addressed the culture of slavery: Christian masters called Christian slaves “brothers” or “sisters.” The New Testament commanded masters to show compassion, justice, and patience. Their position as master meant responsibility and service, not oppression and privilege. A beginning recognizing the injustice of slavery that would take many centuries leading to the abolition of slavery.

Paul of Tarsus taught Christian slave owners that they, with their slaves, were fellow-slaves of the same God. Thus, they were not to mistreat them but rather deal with them as brothers and sisters in Christ. Paul called on human masters to grant “justice and fairness” to their slaves ~Colossians 4:1. In unprecedented fashion, Paul treated slaves as morally responsible persons ~Colossians 3:22 -25 who, like their Christian masters, are “brothers” and part of Christ’s body ~1 Timothy 6:2.3. Christians — slave and master alike — belong to Christ ~Galatians 3:28; Colossians 3:11.

President Abraham Lincoln despised slavery but approached it shrewdly, by taking an incremental strategy. Being an exceptional student of human nature, he recognized that political realities and predictable reactions to abolition required a step, by step approach. The radical abolitionist route of John Brown and William Lloyd Garrison would (and did) simply create a social backlash against hard-core abolitionists and make emancipation much more difficult.

A Spartacus style rebellion against the social order would do the gospel a disservice — and prove a direct threat to an oppressive Roman establishment. Rome would quash flagrant opposition with speedy, lethal force.

It is noteworthy that the abolition of the slave trade throughout the British Empire was the result of a long campaign by Christian abolitionists such as William Wilberforce that would lead to the UK Parliament directing one quarter of the British fleet to shut down the slave trade from West Africa for The Americas.

My favourite New Testament response of Jesus to slavery arises when a Roman Centurion approaches Jesus to heal his much beloved sick servant, who he believed to be dying. Many slave owners treated their slaves as members of their family with the affection normally reserved for their children...Jesus marveled at the faith demonstrated by the Centurion who exclaimed that it was sufficient that Jesus would heal the sick servant, without entering the Centurion's home....knowing that Jesus would be viewed as a traitor were he to enter the house of a Roman officer....the same loving consideration that the Centurion showed for his servant.

All human beings are flawed, with many Christians demonstrating our many imperfections.

 

[frankfrank]

Shouldn't there have been some Supreme Court decisions by now, today. on something? I've heard nothing yet.

 

[T-Rexx]

Starting to see more hilariously unhinged behavior from social cons over the last week.

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/06/1...t-himself-on-fire-to-stop-gays-from-marrying/

http://news.yahoo.com/u-evangelicals-draw-battle-lines-against-same-sex-132020495.html

It could be they know their defeat is approaching.

Now, Mike Huckabee is threatening civil disobedience if SCOTUS rules in favor of marriage equality.

http://www.towleroad.com/2015/06/huckabee-civil-disobedience-gay-marriage/

Huckabee doesn't say what kind of violence he has in mind.

The decision will likely come this Thursday or next Monday since it didn't come down today.

Shouldn't there have been some Supreme Court decisions by now, today. on something? I've heard nothing yet.

Yeah, in a better world there would have been something by now. But this is the Roberts court.

Given this court's loooooooong history of drawing out every gay issue as long as it possibly can, I would not expect anything before Monday, 6/29/15. That is that last possible date on which the court can hand down a ruling from this term.

 

[hotatlboi]

Shouldn't there have been some Supreme Court decisions by now, today. on something? I've heard nothing yet.

There were 4 decisions released this morning.

Kimble v Marvel
Los Angeles v Patel
Kingsley v Hendrickson
Horne v Department of Agriculture

No decisions in the high profile cases (the ACA case and the marriage case). Those will be next Monday at the earliest. Could possible even be later next week if they extend the session.

 

[hotatlboi]

Given this court's loooooooong history of drawing out every gay issue as long as it possibly can, I would not expect anything before Monday, 6/29/15. That is that last possible date on which the court can hand down a ruling from this term.

Small correction, that is the latest date currently calendared in the session. They could add additional dates next week for additional opinions if they don't get to all of them Monday. They have done this before.