Home› Tug Tavern

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register
Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Options

Your Two Dads Can Get Married In All 50 States

AZDuckAZDuck Member Posts: 15,381
First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Answer
in Tug Tavern
LOL, religious right

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/26/supreme-court-same-sex-couples-can-marry-in-all-50-states/

Yeah, Fox News is my source
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
«1

Comments

  • Options
    2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Sounds like pastor Scarborough better buy some matches.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    drogginsdroggins Member Posts: 804
    First Anniversary Name Dropper 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    The Seculars win again!!!!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 102,276
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam
    allpurpleallgold said:

    Now people will be marrying their dogs.

    Got
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 102,276
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam
    I'm concerned that we are offending the terrorists
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,481
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Standard Supporter
    Does Justice Scalia poast here?
    image

    His whole dissent is an interesting read.
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/269769999/Scalia-Dissent
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 102,276
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam
    *sex workers
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    PurpleJPurpleJ Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 36,637
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam
    RaceBannon said:

    *sex workers

    Advanced ejaculation specialists*
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 102,276
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam
    In honor of the ruling


    image
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    BlackieBlackie Member Posts: 499
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes Name Dropper 5 Up Votes
    RaceBannon said:

    The government can't establish or prohibit the free exercise of religion. Are churches that don't want to perform a gay marriage safe from this ruling or are we in for a wedding cake fight on this?

    It is clear to me that the states would have eventually gotten to this point anyway as public opinion shifts so I don't think the ruling is a big deal, other than it is a big deal to same sex couples. The republic will survive and Adam and Steve can now enjoy the same marriage rights as Adam and Eve. I think that's good.

    I think if you get into "forcing" churches to perform a service public opinion will not be on your side.

    Churches should absolutely not be impacted by this ruling.

    Given the constitution is a thing that exists, neither the federal government nor the states should ever have been involved in deciding who* can/can't enter into a contractual agreement providing the mutual "benefits" that we commonly understand as characteristic of marriage.


    *considering basic contract stuff here - consenting adults of sound mind, no coercion involved, etc.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,481
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Standard Supporter
    edited June 2015
    Churches will be sued following this ruling. It might take a while, years perhaps, but it will happen. And a federal district court somewhere will find for the plaintiff.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    bananasnblondesbananasnblondes Member Posts: 14,930
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Standard Supporter
    PurpleJ said:

    RaceBannon said:

    *sex workers

    Advanced ejaculation specialists*
    I am a level 28 wizard when it comes to ejaculating
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    ThomasFremontThomasFremont Member Posts: 13,325
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Churches shouldn't be forced to perform the ceremony if it contradicts their beliefs. Or if they just wanna be dicks. That's their prerogative.

    But I think this is a non-issue. The gays aren't gonna get married in a stuffy old church that doesn't want them. Plenty of other options for event space. The churches won't get any money from those weddings. And so they have to decide if being an asshole is worth hurting their wallet.

    Capitalism!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    PurpleJPurpleJ Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 36,637
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam
    Stained glass and pews are sooooooo five minutes ago
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    AZDuckAZDuck Member Posts: 15,381
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Answer
    edited June 2015
    allpurpleallgold said:

    Now people will be marrying their DaWgs.

    Spooge, TRUE?!?!?!?!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    BlackieBlackie Member Posts: 499
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes Name Dropper 5 Up Votes
    ThomasFremont said:

    Churches shouldn't be forced to perform the ceremony if it contradicts their beliefs. Or if they just wanna be dicks. That's their prerogative.

    But I think this is a non-issue. The gays aren't gonna get married in a stuffy old church that doesn't want them. Plenty of other options for event space. The churches won't get any money from those weddings. And so they have to decide if being an asshole is worth hurting their wallet.

    Capitalism!

    In general, yes. But some activist fags are gonna try to force them into it at some point, and file suit when told "No."
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 102,276
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam
    Blackie said:

    ThomasFremont said:

    Churches shouldn't be forced to perform the ceremony if it contradicts their beliefs. Or if they just wanna be dicks. That's their prerogative.

    But I think this is a non-issue. The gays aren't gonna get married in a stuffy old church that doesn't want them. Plenty of other options for event space. The churches won't get any money from those weddings. And so they have to decide if being an asshole is worth hurting their wallet.

    Capitalism!

    In general, yes. But some activist fags are gonna try to force them into it at some point, and file suit when told "No."
    This. There are plenty of places to buy a fucking wedding cake too.

    When gays try to get married at a mosque I'll pay attention. But they won't. Nor do they target Muslim bakers.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    AZDuckAZDuck Member Posts: 15,381
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Answer
    Blackie said:

    ThomasFremont said:

    Churches shouldn't be forced to perform the ceremony if it contradicts their beliefs. Or if they just wanna be dicks. That's their prerogative.

    But I think this is a non-issue. The gays aren't gonna get married in a stuffy old church that doesn't want them. Plenty of other options for event space. The churches won't get any money from those weddings. And so they have to decide if being an asshole is worth hurting their wallet.

    Capitalism!

    In general, yes. But some activist fags are gonna try to force them into it at some point, and file suit when told "No."
    They'll probably lose. If you look at what this Court has done WRT religious freedom and the free exercise clause, I can't see them extending the strict scrutiny-type analysis they did on civil marriage to private religious institutions.

    For those who never took Constitutional Law, the government is subject to strict scrutiny when it takes discriminatory action WRT a "fundamental right", which the Court just said civil marriage is. Private actors may discriminate, although businesses which are open to the public and "common carriers" may not use racial, ethnic, sex, or age as a discriminatory factor unless they can assert a compelling interest.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.