Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Forum at

Why should YOU join our forums?

  • Reason #1
  • Reason #2
  • Reason #3

Site Description

How do you think SCOTUS will rule on gay "marriage"

Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by Drjones, Dec 8, 2012.

  1. Please do not discuss the merits of gay "marriage" as that goes nowhere except thread lock.

    I'm curious to know how you people think SCOTUS will rule on the two gay "marriage" cases before it.

    My confidence in the court to give an unbiased and constitutional ruling is greatly diminished after the obamacare ruling, but there's always hope....
  2. TK-421


    Oct 12, 2012
    Pflugerville, TX
    There is no reason why they shouldn't rule it is as constitutional.

    It all comes down to one simple question.

    Should one American Citizen be able to marry another American Citizen. Answer that exact question yes or no. Don't worry about their gender, religion, race, sexual orientation, hair style, type of car they drive, nothing. Just base it on the fact that homosexuals are American Citizens, and they should be afforded the rights that other American Citizens can get, thanks to the fact that they're straight.

    The Declaration of Independence clearly states that all men are created equal. ALL men, not "All straight men are created equal and gay men are lesser citizens."

  3. hogfish

    hogfish Señor Member

    Aug 4, 2005
    My money is on gay marriage will be ruled as costitutional; no to the 'defense of marriage'.
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2012
  4. Syclone538


    Jan 8, 2006
    I don't know anything about the two cases, and didn't know there were any before seeing this thread.

    If they rule against freedom now, it will take them a long time to fix it because they really don't like to change positions, stare decisis.
  5. Cavalry Doc

    Cavalry Doc MAJ (USA Ret.)

    Feb 22, 2005
    Republic of Texas
    not very likely that they will enforce the 10th amendment and leave it up to the states.
  6. Bruce H

    Bruce H

    Dec 5, 2000
    If they don't rule in favor of freedom they are lying SOB's that need removed from the bench.
  7. G29Reload

    G29Reload Tread Lightly

    Sep 28, 2009
    Exactly wrong. The are (supposed to be) ruling on whether the two laws in questions are constitutional.

    EX: A lot of people think abortion is constitutional. It is not.

    The ruling in the matter was whether a law against it was legal as written. A law written later in a different fashion could adhere to COTUS principles and still outlaw it for some different reasoning or logic. As construed Roe v Wade did not meet that test.
  8. TK-421


    Oct 12, 2012
    Pflugerville, TX
    Yes they are supposed to be ruling on whether the two laws in question are constitutional, but they also have the option on keeping the california decision strictly in california, or making the decision affect the entire country. So they have the option of saying whether or not gay marriage is legal in the entire US, and not just in California.

    And to think of a group of people as lower class citizens just because of their sexual orientation is not only unconstitutional, but very discriminatory.
  9. snerd


    Apr 20, 2007
    They'll rewrite it as a tax. Problem solved.
  10. GAFinch


    Feb 23, 2009
    They've already ruled abortion and sodomy as unconstitutional even though they were both illegal when the Constitution was written, so they'll probably declare this legal also.
  11. Vic777


    Jan 23, 2006
    And that's true, then some Queer turns you! :rofl::rofl:
  12. W420Hunter


    Jun 25, 2007
    There is a larger hidden issue hidden in this, and weather or not gay marriage is ruled constitutional or not the church will lose. What we really need to be asking is weather or not it is constitutional for the state to order the church to do or not do something that is inherently a religious institution. No matter who wins it invites the state to have power over the church. So how how any true conservative could be for this is something I can not grasp.
  13. AlexHassin


    Dec 15, 2010
    as far as i have heard, none of these rules say that a religious institution has to preform a wedding ceremony for anyone.
  14. Sam Spade

    Sam Spade Staff Member Lifetime Member

    May 4, 2003
    If, as some insist, the government has no role in marriage, the SCOTUS *ought* to bump the matter down to the states and uphold (for instance) the CA state constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man-one woman.

    I doubt that an activist court will rule with such restraint.
  15. Ruble Noon

    Ruble Noon "Cracker"

    Feb 18, 2009
  16. fx77

    fx77 CLM

    Nov 23, 2008
    If it is anything like Obamacare..Roberts will say it is a civil right and vote for Gay Marriage
  17. Gunnut 45/454

    Gunnut 45/454

    Jun 20, 2002
    Well considering how they upheld Obamacare, I have zero confidence this court will side with our founders on the basic foundations of our country. We'll slip further into moral depravity. As to how it's constituional please someone show me where in the COTUS it say's anyone has a right to be married? Marriage is a religous right not a constitutional right! Never seen a Federal marriage license!!:rofl:

    Further more the only reason STATES got involved with marriage licensing was for taxing purposes! Then of course lawyers for money in devorce/property rights IE taxing!
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2012
  18. GAFinch


    Feb 23, 2009
    A church can be told to host a wedding reception, a religious school can be told to not teach traditional views on marriage and homosexuality, and religious adoption and foster care agencies can be told to offer services to gay couples. Don't mistake freedom of worship for freedom of religion.

    BTW, Democrats have already floated the idea of forcing military chaplains to perform same sex ceremonies.