Author Topic: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage  (Read 113398 times)

BayGBM

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19437
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1175 on: October 07, 2014, 06:49:12 AM »
For some reason they don't understand that even if we ban a gay marriage, there will still be a shit-ton of gay people in the world.  Nothing that can be done about it.  I say if you don't like gay people, just leave them alone.  Most of them don't want to be around you either.  I don't know, people are strange.

It is so funny/sad to see how conservatives have gotten bent out of shape over gay marriage.  Think of all the wasted money they have raised and energy they have spent trying to stop it.  If even a fraction of those resources were devoted to more productive pursuits (education, biomedical research, renewable energy, etc.) we would be living in a very different world.  It is hard not to notice that they did the same thing during the Civil Rights era... Tell me, as a conservative do you feel proud or ashamed when you see how your parents and grandparents behaved in the 50s and 60s and reflect on the views they held and codified into law ?

LurkerNoMore

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31104
  • Dumb people think Trump is smart.
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1176 on: October 07, 2014, 06:51:05 AM »
Hopefully one day we can meet so I video me beating the holy fuck out you. Ever make it to California, pussy?

God has created a few people that can kick my ass.  But he hasn't created a manlet like you that could do it yet.  Even with a step ladder for you stand on, you couldn't do shit.  Dumb ass.

BayGBM

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19437
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1177 on: October 07, 2014, 06:51:45 AM »
Who the F cares really?  This is like No. 235451 in the list of important things going on right now. 

Ah, the voice of resignation from someone who knows the battle is over.  No worries though; I am sure “conservatives” will come up with a new boogieman to demonize in no time.  Oh, look over there!  It’s an illegal immigrant! >:(

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39478
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1178 on: October 07, 2014, 06:53:01 AM »
Ah, the voice of resignation from someone who knows the battle is over.  No worries though; I am sure “conservatives” will come up with a new boogieman to demonize in no time.  Oh, look over there!  It’s an illegal immigrant! >:(

I don't give a  f at all - let gays marry and get it over with.   As for illegals - f em all - ship em out - send them all back.  They are a drain on this country and not needed or wanted

LurkerNoMore

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31104
  • Dumb people think Trump is smart.
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1179 on: October 07, 2014, 06:54:49 AM »
Lukers problem is he's (and I mean with all sincerity) too fucking stupid to realize that he almost got kicked off of here for doing the same crap he's doing now. He stopped for a couple of weeks then it's like he can't help but to leave off whet he ended. He's definitely has a screw loose.

You and Beach spent DAYS, repeat DAYS, whining to Ron to ban me.   You little pussy bitch.  Ron timed me out for 48 hours because - as he said - he was tired of listening to the nonstop whining and endless PMs.  

You talking about someone being stupid is like a turtle giving racing lessons.   You are considered the dumbest person on this board by the vast majority.


LurkerNoMore

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31104
  • Dumb people think Trump is smart.
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1180 on: October 07, 2014, 06:57:11 AM »
Ah, the voice of resignation from someone who knows the battle is over.  No worries though; I am sure “conservatives” will come up with a new boogieman to demonize in no time.  Oh, look over there!  It’s an illegal immigrant! >:(

Depends on who you ask.  Still got to eliminate the gay agenda or else people will be marrying kids or their dogs.  Isn't that how the mantra goes?

BayGBM

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19437
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1181 on: October 07, 2014, 09:09:56 AM »
Conservatives decry Supreme Court’s move on gay marriage
By Karen Tumulty

Conservative religious groups and a handful of Republican lawmakers decried the Supreme Court’s decision Monday to allow same-sex marriage rulings to stand in five states, saying it will help motivate voters to the polls in protest.

But most Republican leaders in Congress and elsewhere stayed relatively silent, underscoring the extent to which support for gay marriage has expanded in the decade since President George W. Bush (R) supported a constitutional amendment to ban such unions.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), a popular tea party conservative and potential 2016 presidential contender, called the court’s move “tragic and indefensible” and vowed to introduce a constitutional amendment allowing states to ban gay marriage.

“This is judicial activism at its worst,” Cruz said in a statement. “The Constitution entrusts state legislatures, elected by the People, to define marriage consistent with the values and mores of their citizens. Unelected judges should not be imposing their policy preferences to subvert the considered judgments of democratically elected legislatures.”

Groups that oppose same-sex marriage, meanwhile, said they are preparing for the political equivalent of hand-to-hand combat.

The court’s decision — which could clear the way for gay marriage in a number of other states — “is likely to act as a motivator of socially conservative voters in the next 29 days” until the midterms, said Ralph Reed, head of the Faith and Freedom Coalition.

In Iowa, where there is a closely fought Senate battle, the issue will be featured prominently in 350,000 voter guides that Reed’s group plans to distribute in more than 1,000 churches, as well as in 375,000 pieces of mail it plans to send, he added.

The group hopes to fuel the kind of sentiment that in 2010 saw three justices of the Iowa Supreme Court kicked out of office over their votes making the state the third in the nation to recognize same-sex marriage. This year, the Senate race pits Rep. Bruce Braley, a Democrat who favors same-sex marriage, against Republican state Sen. Joni Ernst, who has tried to again ban gay marriage in Iowa through a state constitutional amendment.

David Lane, head of the evangelical American Renewal Project, said his organization also plans to take aim at lower-court judges who have overturned anti-gay-marriage statutes and constitutional provisions.

“Impeachment begins in the House. I can’t figure out why a simple congressman won’t drop a bill of impeachment to remove people who are doing this to our country,” Lane said. “We’re going to deal with these problems — unelected and unaccountable judges — who have no right to interfere with the will of a free people.”

In addition to Cruz, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) said that the Supreme Court’s decision was “disappointing” and that justices should affirm that states have the right to restrict marriage to a union between a man and a woman.

The larger currents of public opinion are moving swiftly in favor of same-sex marriage, with well over half the public expressing support. Prominent Democrats — including President Obama and potential 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton — have renounced their previous opposition to it. Many Republican politicians seem to want to avoid the issue entirely.

But Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R), who supports his state’s ban on same-sex marriage, said he is a “supporter of traditional marriage” and will not be swayed by polls. “I’m not a weather vane like President Obama or Hillary Clinton,” he said during an appearance at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. “I happen to believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.”

Many conservative activists say they expect the high court to eventually come down directly in favor of same-sex marriage — a possibility they compare to the Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion in 1973. Roe helped galvanize a relatively small antiabortion movement into a potent political force.

“Not taking these appeals from states that are deeply conservative states is to kick the can down the road,” Reed said. “There would be only one reason to do that.”

In a statement put out by his organization, Reed said: “For candidates running in 2014 and those who run for president in 2016, there will be no avoiding this issue. If the Supreme Court is planning a Roe v. Wade on marriage, it will sow the wind and reap a political whirlwind.”

 ::)

Coach is Back!

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 59686
  • It’s All Bullshit
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1182 on: October 07, 2014, 09:23:50 AM »
You and Beach spent DAYS, repeat DAYS, whining to Ron to ban me.   You little pussy bitch.  Ron timed me out for 48 hours because - as he said - he was tired of listening to the nonstop whining and endless PMs.  

You talking about someone being stupid is like a turtle giving racing lessons.   You are considered the dumbest person on this board by the vast majority.



Because you can't come up with anything better than this ^^^^

LurkerNoMore

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31104
  • Dumb people think Trump is smart.
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1183 on: October 07, 2014, 01:02:46 PM »
Because you can't come up with anything better than this ^^^^

I don't have to come up with anything better than that.  Those are the facts.  You were the little pussy whining for DAYS.  Not me. 

Whine on.

BayGBM

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19437
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1184 on: October 07, 2014, 03:29:15 PM »
Gay marriage bans in Idaho, Nevada struck down
By Associated Press October 7 at 6:01 PM

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal appeals court declared gay marriage legal in Idaho and Nevada on Tuesday, a day after the U.S. Supreme Court effectively legalized same-sex marriage in 30 other states.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco struck down Idaho and Nevada’s bans on gay marriage, ruling they violated equal protection rights.

The court also has jurisdiction in three other states that still have marriage bans in place: Alaska, Arizona and Montana. Lawsuits challenging bans in those states are still pending in lower courts and have not reached the 9th Circuit.

Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote for a unanimous three-judge panel that laws that treat people differently based on sexual orientation are unconstitutional unless there is a compelling government interest. He wrote that neither Idaho nor Nevada offered any legitimate reasons to discriminate against gay couples.

 “Idaho and Nevada’s marriage laws, by preventing same-sex couples from marrying and refusing to recognize same-sex marriages celebrated elsewhere, impose profound legal, financial, social and psychic harms on numerous citizens of those states,” Reinhardt wrote.

He rejected the argument that same-sex marriages will devalue traditional marriage, leading to more out-of-wedlock births.

“This proposition reflects a crass and callous view of parental love and the parental bond that is not worthy of response,” Reinhardt wrote. “We reject it out of hand.”

Technically, the court upheld a trial judge’s ruling striking down Idaho’s ban and reversed a lower court ruling upholding Nevada’s ban

Reinhardt ordered a “prompt issuance” of a lower court order to let same-sex couples wed In Nevada.

 “We are absolutely delighted that wedding bells will finally be ringing for same-sex couples in Nevada,” said Tara Borelli, the lawyer who argued the Nevada case for Lambda Legal.

Monte Neil Stewart, the Idaho-based attorney who argued the case for Nevada on behalf of the Coalition for the Protection of Marriage, declined to say whether he’ll challenge the order for the prompt start to same-sex marriages. Nevada’s governor and attorney general dropped out of the appeal earlier this year.

Reinhardt didn’t say when marriages should start in Idaho.

Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden’s spokesman Todd Dvorak said his office believes the 9th Circuit’s stay on marriages pending a U.S. Supreme Court appeal remains in place.

“We are reviewing the decision by the court and assessing all of Idaho’s legal options,” Wasden said in a prepared statement.

Sue Latta and Traci Ehlers sued Idaho last year to compel Idaho to recognize their 2008 marriage in California. Three other couples also joined the lawsuit to invalidate Idaho’s same-sex marriage ban.

“This is a super sweet victory,” said Latta, who said the ruling came much sooner than she expected.

“Taxes are easier, real estate is easier, parenting is easier, end of life planning is easier,” Latta said. “We no longer have to hire an attorney. We have a valid marriage license.”

State and federal court judges have been striking down bans at a rapid rate since a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year. The 9th Circuit ruling comes a day after the nation’s top court effectively legalized gay marriage in 11 more states, for a total of 30, when it rejected a set of appeals.

The appeals court panel did not rule on a similar case in Hawaii, which legalized gay marriage in December. Hawaii’s governor had asked the court to toss out a lawsuit challenging the state’s ban and an appeal to the 9th Circuit filed before Hawaii lawmakers legalized same-sex marriage.

All three judges on the panel were appointed by Democratic presidents. President Bill Clinton appointed Judges Marsha Berzon and Ronald Gould. President Jimmy Carter appointed Judge Stephen Reinhardt.

During oral arguments in September, the debate in the appeals court over Idaho and Nevada bans focused on harm to children.

Lawyers seeking to invalidate the bans argued children of gay couples are stigmatized when their parents are prevented from marrying. Attorneys supporting the bans said gay marriages devalue traditional marriages, which will lead to fewer weddings and more single-parent homes.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63786
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1185 on: October 07, 2014, 07:41:18 PM »
You and Beach spent DAYS, repeat DAYS, whining to Ron to ban me.   You little pussy bitch.  Ron timed me out for 48 hours because - as he said - he was tired of listening to the nonstop whining and endless PMs.  

You talking about someone being stupid is like a turtle giving racing lessons.   You are considered the dumbest person on this board by the vast majority.



I cannot speak for anyone else, but I sent three PMS to Ron (two on the same day), with quotes by you on the board involving other members of the board.  I asked him for a seven-day timeout.  He thought a shorter ban was more appropriate.  I suspect your next one will be longer.  He put you in timeout because of the things you say on the board, not just because people have complained about it. 

And Coach is right:  you really don't know where to draw the line.  Someone said you are under 30?  If so, then I understand your immaturity, classlessness, and poor judgment much better.  If you're older than 30, I feel sorry for you, because you're probably stuck with this level of ignorance for life.

It really isn't that hard to communicate with people without constantly engaging in personal attacks.  If you have someone on the board repeatedly wanting to actually fight you in real life because you call them names every friggin day, you'd think you would have the good sense to knock it off already.   

LurkerNoMore

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31104
  • Dumb people think Trump is smart.
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1186 on: October 07, 2014, 09:36:42 PM »
^^  When the said idiot wanting to fight every day in real life is under 5'2" and a whining pussy, there really isn't anything to worry about. 

whork

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6587
  • Getbig!
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1187 on: October 07, 2014, 10:12:54 PM »
Who the F cares really?  This is like No. 235451 in the list of important things going on right now. 


Yes lets make another Obama thread instead right freak? :)

catracho

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1319
  • I don't want to be "that guy"!
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1188 on: October 08, 2014, 12:30:05 AM »
Gay marriage bans in Idaho, Nevada struck down
By Associated Press October 7 at 6:01 PM

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal appeals court declared gay marriage legal in Idaho and Nevada on Tuesday, a day after the U.S. Supreme Court effectively legalized same-sex marriage in 30 other states.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco struck down Idaho and Nevada’s bans on gay marriage, ruling they violated equal protection rights.

The court also has jurisdiction in three other states that still have marriage bans in place: Alaska, Arizona and Montana. Lawsuits challenging bans in those states are still pending in lower courts and have not reached the 9th Circuit.

Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote for a unanimous three-judge panel that laws that treat people differently based on sexual orientation are unconstitutional unless there is a compelling government interest. He wrote that neither Idaho nor Nevada offered any legitimate reasons to discriminate against gay couples.

 “Idaho and Nevada’s marriage laws, by preventing same-sex couples from marrying and refusing to recognize same-sex marriages celebrated elsewhere, impose profound legal, financial, social and psychic harms on numerous citizens of those states,” Reinhardt wrote.

He rejected the argument that same-sex marriages will devalue traditional marriage, leading to more out-of-wedlock births.

“This proposition reflects a crass and callous view of parental love and the parental bond that is not worthy of response,” Reinhardt wrote. “We reject it out of hand.”

Technically, the court upheld a trial judge’s ruling striking down Idaho’s ban and reversed a lower court ruling upholding Nevada’s ban

Reinhardt ordered a “prompt issuance” of a lower court order to let same-sex couples wed In Nevada.

 “We are absolutely delighted that wedding bells will finally be ringing for same-sex couples in Nevada,” said Tara Borelli, the lawyer who argued the Nevada case for Lambda Legal.

Monte Neil Stewart, the Idaho-based attorney who argued the case for Nevada on behalf of the Coalition for the Protection of Marriage, declined to say whether he’ll challenge the order for the prompt start to same-sex marriages. Nevada’s governor and attorney general dropped out of the appeal earlier this year.

Reinhardt didn’t say when marriages should start in Idaho.

Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden’s spokesman Todd Dvorak said his office believes the 9th Circuit’s stay on marriages pending a U.S. Supreme Court appeal remains in place.

“We are reviewing the decision by the court and assessing all of Idaho’s legal options,” Wasden said in a prepared statement.

Sue Latta and Traci Ehlers sued Idaho last year to compel Idaho to recognize their 2008 marriage in California. Three other couples also joined the lawsuit to invalidate Idaho’s same-sex marriage ban.

“This is a super sweet victory,” said Latta, who said the ruling came much sooner than she expected.

“Taxes are easier, real estate is easier, parenting is easier, end of life planning is easier,” Latta said. “We no longer have to hire an attorney. We have a valid marriage license.”

State and federal court judges have been striking down bans at a rapid rate since a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year. The 9th Circuit ruling comes a day after the nation’s top court effectively legalized gay marriage in 11 more states, for a total of 30, when it rejected a set of appeals.

The appeals court panel did not rule on a similar case in Hawaii, which legalized gay marriage in December. Hawaii’s governor had asked the court to toss out a lawsuit challenging the state’s ban and an appeal to the 9th Circuit filed before Hawaii lawmakers legalized same-sex marriage.

All three judges on the panel were appointed by Democratic presidents. President Bill Clinton appointed Judges Marsha Berzon and Ronald Gould. President Jimmy Carter appointed Judge Stephen Reinhardt.

During oral arguments in September, the debate in the appeals court over Idaho and Nevada bans focused on harm to children.

Lawyers seeking to invalidate the bans argued children of gay couples are stigmatized when their parents are prevented from marrying. Attorneys supporting the bans said gay marriages devalue traditional marriages, which will lead to fewer weddings and more single-parent homes.

Whatever you believe, SCOTUS's inaction paves the way for millions of wasted taxpayer dollars funding the fight for and against gay marriage.  They could have ended the debate once and for all, how they allow this to go on is beyond me.  Isn't that what they are for, to decide the Constitutionality of laws?  They should be disbanded for this! 

Pray_4_War

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15801
  • Thot Expert
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1189 on: October 08, 2014, 02:33:34 AM »
Tell me, as a conservative do you feel proud or ashamed when you see how your parents and grandparents behaved in the 50s and 60s and reflect on the views they held and codified into law ?

That question kind of assumes that you have to be one or the other.  Proud or ashamed.  I'm neither.

It also assumes that my grandparents were hosing down negros and treating them like animals.  They weren't.

When it comes to the civil right's movement in the 60's I believe the good guys won.  I am proud to live in a country that can fuck up royally but then have the courage to do a 180% and try to right a wrong.  Sometimes it takes longer than it should but it's nice to see a willingness to admit when you are fucking up.  Doesn't happen too often in this world.  Now, a discussion on how bad black people fucked up this country after guilty whites started kissing their asses can be saved for another thread.

BayGBM

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19437
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1190 on: October 08, 2014, 04:05:12 AM »
Whatever you believe, SCOTUS's inaction paves the way for millions of wasted taxpayer dollars funding the fight for and against gay marriage.  They could have ended the debate once and for all, how they allow this to go on is beyond me.  Isn't that what they are for, to decide the Constitutionality of laws?  They should be disbanded for this! 

Hardly.  The Court appropriately declines to hear these kinds of cases all the time.  When they do so they are sending a very clear signal: "we agree with the lower Court's ruling and believe it should stand; move on."  Just because something is a hot button or has garnered wide interest doesn't oblige the Court to take on a case.  When a lower Court makes a ruling that the SCOTUS views as wrong or sufficiently debatable then they take on the case.  In this case, if one of the lower Courts votes to uphold the ban on gay marriage and it were appealed you can bet the SCOTUS will take on that case.

Archer77

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14174
  • Team Shizzo
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1191 on: October 08, 2014, 04:31:10 AM »
It is so funny/sad to see how conservatives have gotten bent out of shape over gay marriage.  Think of all the wasted money they have raised and energy they have spent trying to stop it.  If even a fraction of those resources were devoted to more productive pursuits (education, biomedical research, renewable energy, etc.) we would be living in a very different world.  It is hard not to notice that they did the same thing during the Civil Rights era... Tell me, as a conservative do you feel proud or ashamed when you see how your parents and grandparents behaved in the 50s and 60s and reflect on the views they held and codified into law ?

Why should anyone be ashamed about something they have no responsibility for?  Do you think its moral to ask someone to feel responsible for someone else actions?  Are you ashamed of the behavior of the black community, such as rampant crime, violence and fathers abandoning their children to be raised by the state? Are you ashamed when you read about how your ancestors sold their own people as slaves to Arabs and Europeans?  Do you see how silly and unethical asking that question is?
A

BayGBM

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19437
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1192 on: October 08, 2014, 08:01:02 AM »
That question kind of assumes that you have to be one or the other.  Proud or ashamed.  I'm neither.

It also assumes that my grandparents were hosing down negros and treating them like animals.  They weren't.

When it comes to the civil right's movement in the 60's I believe the good guys won.  I am proud to live in a country that can fuck up royally but then have the courage to do a 180% and try to right a wrong.  Sometimes it takes longer than it should but it's nice to see a willingness to admit when you are fucking up.  Doesn't happen too often in this world.  Now, a discussion on how bad black people fucked up this country after guilty whites started kissing their asses can be saved for another thread.

Why should anyone be ashamed about something they have no responsibility for?  Do you think its moral to ask someone to feel responsible for someone else actions?  Are you ashamed of the behavior of the black community, such as rampant crime, violence and fathers abandoning their children to be raised by the state? Are you ashamed when you read about how your ancestors sold their own people as slaves to Arabs and Europeans?  Do you see how silly and unethical asking that question is?

How amusing.  If your parents or grandparents were decorated war heroes or sports stars, I have no doubt you would speak of them with pride and even brag about their accomplishments as if they were your very own.  Had they invented some innovative technology or were renown artists, I am sure you would not hesitate to express pride in their public accomplishments.  Had they been esteemed politicians with progressive world views or descended from the Mayflower or the Arabella ( http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=102286.0 ) you would probably be quick to embrace that too.  People do this all the time, but when your literal or political ancestors are demonstrably on the wrong side of history or even turn out to be the villains in the American story the convenient reaction is “I’ve got nothing to do with that.  Why should I feel ashamed?”  Here is one reason: you claim the same “conservative” title they do; you try to keep doors closed, just as they did.  The point of feeling ashamed is to learn from the errors of those who came before you.  To not repeat the same mistakes they did.  To succeed (in realizing America’s values) where they miserably failed.  Of course, not everyone wants to do that.  Some are content, even eager, to fight the old battles even as they go down in flames and into history’s dustbin.

BayGBM

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19437
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1193 on: October 08, 2014, 08:10:41 AM »
Federal employees were key to gay marriage court victories
By Joe Davidson

Look behind the incredible speed of same-sex marriage judicial victories, including Monday’s Supreme Court decision, and you’ll find federal employees.

They are not high-profile politicians or appointed officials. You won’t find them on the Sunday morning talk shows or in the national headlines. But they have been in the vanguard of the marriage equality movement even as they toil in their everyday, low-key jobs.

In fact, the first lawsuit against the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which prevented the federal government from recognizing same sex marriages, was filed in 2009 under the name of a postal worker in Massachusetts.

Fast forward to Monday.

With the Supreme Court’s decision to let stand lower court rulings that allow same-sex marriages, expect those unions to soon be permitted in most of America. The effort for marriage equality isn’t over, but victory is in sight.

Victory wasn’t certain when Nancy Gill, a business mail entry clerk at a post office in Brockton, began her fight. The 27-year U.S. Postal Service employee is the named plaintiff in Gill v. OPM, the lawsuit against the Office of Personnel Management, which denied employer-sponsored health insurance to her wife.

That was the “first concerted, multi-plaintiff legal challenge to Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act,” according to Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), which represented Gill and others.

Gill was optimistic even when many were doubtful, not to mention those who were, and remain, fiercely opposed. “I always knew, I always had a feeling that justice would prevail,” she said by phone Tuesday. “I cannot see how a group of intelligent people, whether they be Supreme Court justices or CEOs or newspaper delivery people … can say that there’s anything that harms anybody by respecting the rights of gay people to marry.”

This week’s decision follows last year’s Supreme Court ruling in U.S. v. Windsor that struck down a key section of DOMA. That decision led to the amazing string of lower court rulings allowing same-sex marriages. Windsor drew directly from Gill.

“The legal framework developed in that case was used in subsequent cases, including the Windsor case,” according to GLAD.

“I’m thrilled,” Gill said. “Absolutely thrilled.”

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39478
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1194 on: October 08, 2014, 08:14:05 AM »
Gays are what 2% of the population?  Who gives a flying fuck?  Seriously - get married and STFU already.  NO ONE GIVES A FUCK

LurkerNoMore

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31104
  • Dumb people think Trump is smart.
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1195 on: October 08, 2014, 08:40:04 AM »
Gays are what 2% of the population?  Who gives a flying fuck?  Seriously - get married and STFU already.  NO ONE GIVES A FUCK

You would think it would be easy to see it like this.  But some people hold on to warped views and knee jerk opinions because of their own biased fears.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63786
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1196 on: October 08, 2014, 09:13:25 AM »
That question kind of assumes that you have to be one or the other.  Proud or ashamed.  I'm neither.

It also assumes that my grandparents were hosing down negros and treating them like animals.  They weren't.

When it comes to the civil right's movement in the 60's I believe the good guys won.  I am proud to live in a country that can fuck up royally but then have the courage to do a 180% and try to right a wrong.  Sometimes it takes longer than it should but it's nice to see a willingness to admit when you are fucking up.  Doesn't happen too often in this world.  Now, a discussion on how bad black people fucked up this country after guilty whites started kissing their asses can be saved for another thread.

Outstanding.  Short and to the point, but one of the best posts I've read on the board in a while. 

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63786
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1197 on: October 08, 2014, 09:17:16 AM »
How amusing.  If your parents or grandparents were decorated war heroes or sports stars, I have no doubt you would speak of them with pride and even brag about their accomplishments as if they were your very own.  Had they invented some innovative technology or were renown artists, I am sure you would not hesitate to express pride in their public accomplishments.  Had they been esteemed politicians with progressive world views or descended from the Mayflower or the Arabella ( http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=102286.0 ) you would probably be quick to embrace that too.  People do this all the time, but when your literal or political ancestors are demonstrably on the wrong side of history or even turn out to be the villains in the American story the convenient reaction is “I’ve got nothing to do with that.  Why should I feel ashamed?”  Here is one reason: you claim the same “conservative” title they do; you try to keep doors closed, just as they did.  The point of feeling ashamed is to learn from the errors of those who came before you.  To not repeat the same mistakes they did.  To succeed (in realizing America’s values) where they miserably failed.  Of course, not everyone wants to do that.  Some are content, even eager, to fight the old battles even as they go down in flames and into history’s dustbin.

This is incredibly inaccurate.  Preservation of traditional marriage was not a "conservative" cause.  It was bipartisan until about two or three years ago. 

By your logic, you are ashamed of Obama, Hillary, Biden, both Clintons, and every liberal and/or Democrat who voted for the Defense of Marriage Act.  You are embarrassed by all of those people, of all ethnic backgrounds (including a solid majority of black folks), who voted to preserve traditional marriage from California to the East Coast. 

I have been saying for years that the tide has turned and this marriage issue is done already, but don't try and revise history to make it seem like this wasn't something the entire country was pretty unified about. 

BayGBM

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19437
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1198 on: October 08, 2014, 09:58:44 AM »
Senator Ted Cruz called the Supreme Court’s decision to take no action “judicial activism at its worst.” Still more proof that the best definition of judicial activism is: “any decision I don’t like.”  ::)

                                               --Gail Collins

LurkerNoMore

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31104
  • Dumb people think Trump is smart.
Re: Supreme Court Affirms Right to Gay Marriage
« Reply #1199 on: October 08, 2014, 11:07:20 AM »
When the SC rules the way you want, it is called upholding the Constitution and protecting America.  When they rule differently it is called legislating from the bench.