Supreme Court gives gay couples the right to marry!

The only group that is going to really benefit from the ruling are the divorce lawyers. Originally Posted by pyramider

Lol. Yes, if there is one constant in American history, it is that the lawyers always win...

Riddle me this...if a male child is raised by a gay couple does he have a propensity to be gay when grows up?

Riddle me this...if a male child is raised by a gay couple does he have a propensity to be gay when grows up? Originally Posted by oilfieldscum

1gay+1gay+boy=3gays

Riddle me this...if a male child is raised by a gay couple does he have a propensity to be gay when grows up? Originally Posted by oilfieldscum

Yep

Damn and I thought I was an asshole...

Who they fuck don't make me cum.. to each their own!

And do you really think it's a good thing that 5 lawyers impose their prejudices, beliefs, interests upon a citizenry who are overwhelmingly opposed? Five lawyers are right, and the American polis are wrong? Originally Posted by Don T. Lukbak

"Fifty-seven percent of Americans support legalizing same-sex marriage. Majorities of Democrats (69 percent) and independents (59 percent) support it, while 55 percent of Republicans do not."

www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-americans-views-on-same-sex-marriage/

Comparison of time frames of legalizing interracial marriage vs gay marriage

I'm still waiting for gay divorce court, and same sex cheating partners on Maury.

Glad about it for a more practical reason. LBGT are approximately 4% of us population. Now can we please stop wasting this much oxygen on 4% of the population (2012 Gallup) and start talking about junk that affects everyone, taxes, entitlements, etc. Up to this point, you have to live off the grid to not hear a story about gays and the courts.

It's just called marriage now....

It's hard to believe that this was only 48 years ago.. or not.

CBS, Mike Wallace March 7, 1967

My thoughts:

Marriage is s religious thing. Civil unions are a legal thing. I see the two as separate and I don't think the government should be telling a church what it has to do. Is it just a word? No not really. I say that because you change the meaning of one word, you end up opening the door and stepping onto a very slippery slope. NOW, I am for gays getting into civil unions. If you love someone, you love someone.
So long as they are held to ALLLLLLL of the same legal standards as the rest of us: alimony, child support etc. There are many men out there who have been slapped with child support simply because they established the "relationship" as the father. YES, it does happen, look it up So, I do expect that to happen to the other men and women who marry and divorce. Equality can be a bitch I do see that community trying to skip around all of that though.

My thoughts.....

I don't care one way or the other, if two people want to be together then fuck it let them be. Personally I don't like the whole comparison to civli rights, I think that comparison is a load of crap just used to push the agenda. I'm also baffled by the "constitutional right" to get married but whatever.

I looked at Facebook today....

The skittles factory got blown up by some rednecks....

***I have not read this thread.***

In my opinion, the government should get of the marriage business entirely.

It really is none of their fucking business nor should they have the right to deny opportunity by requiring a licence sold for a fee. I can't believe the sheeples before us tolerated such insanity.

That was the original basis....*control* or limit who got married.

The main reason marriage laws have become complex is because they define what happens when the marriage is over by separation or death or other.

For instance....what happens to a retirement plan when one dies.

I'm not able to study the current case now. But the complicated case two years ago related to the two women (one of which was dead) was really more related to death taxes than gay marriage.

Maybe one solution would be for the government to stop the policy of taxing dead people.

To illustrate complexity, take the Obamacare case that is there in scotus now. The Obamacare section on subsidies is illegal because it conflicts with an existing law. So our books of laws have become so extensive and complicated that it is becoming difficult to pass new laws that are legal.

Most of you probably don't know that the Dems got help from the Solicitor General to provide guidance on how to write the individual mandate to be Constitutional. She did such a great job at it, that she was promoted to Supreme Court Justice.

Long ago, the feds capped the occupancy of the House. So today, we have "only" 535 law makers plus 2 more if you count the two dip shits in the white house. (VP votes in Senate ties.) (I've forgotten what representation D.C. now has but it makes no difference to my point.)

So....535 of them mo fo's get up every morning to go to the office and pass laws for you. Most of the dip shits have never changed the oil in a car. Some probably have never regularly bought groceries for their families. I wonder how many have even changed a soiled diaper.

I'm sure there are exceptions. But consider the late Ted Kennedy. Like he knew what daily life was about? ....yeah right.

I remember when the elder George Bush (iirc) didn't know what the bar code scanner was at the grocery store.

Well I can go on about this forever. But quoting Ronald Reagan when it comes to the government solving our problems: "Government *is* the problem."

night night Mitches....

A similar Republic 2000 years ago also allowed homosexual promiscuity, the decline of the Roman Empire was precluded by it's moral degradation. Just a sign of the times. Keep an eye on the Yellowstone Caldera as vision of Vesuvius dance through the imagination. A bit over dramatic, agreed, but the United States of America is failing as a world power and the decision of "5 lawyers" is just a small piece of the puzzle. Looking at the larger picture, saddens me.
Also saddened by the loss of the skittles factory. No more rainbows?