SCOTUS to hear Marriage Equality cases on March 26-27

by: Its the Supreme Court Stupid

Mon Jan 07, 2013 at 15:11:51 PM EST



In their scheduling orders announced today, the Supreme Court announced that it will hear the Marriage Equality Cases on March 26 and 27, as reported by SCOTUSBlog.  http://www.scotusblog.com/2013...


Photobucket


Its the Supreme Court Stupid :: SCOTUS to hear Marriage Equality cases on March 26-27
The first case, Hollingsworth v. Perry, the case arising out of the challenge to PropHate, will be heard on March 26 and the court will hear arguments on the following: (1) Whether the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the State of California from defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman; and (2) whether petitioners have standing under Article III, § 2 of the Constitution in this case.
(Petitoners, here, are those seeking to overturn the decision of the Ninth Circuit, which found Prop 8 to be unconstitutional.)

The second case, US v. Windsor, arises out of DOMA and arguments will be heard on March 27.  The questions to be considered are: (1) Whether Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) violates the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection of the laws as applied to persons of the same sex who are legally married under the laws of their State; (2) whether the Executive Branch's agreement with the court below that DOMA is unconstitutional deprives this Court of jurisdiction to decide this case; and (3) whether the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the United States House of Representatives has Article III standing in this case.  

Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Tips for a decision upholding Marriage (2.00 / 47)
Equality and invalidating DOMA (and giving a REAL headache to Antonin Scalia)

I am for the individual over government, government over big business and the environment over all. -- William O. Douglas

anything that gives scalia a headache.... (2.00 / 35)
this, or thowing hammers.  sign me the fuck up.

DOMA WILL FALL. it's just a matter of time.

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
What about Thomas and Alito?? ;) eom (2.00 / 18)


[ Parent ]
Oh yeah, (2.00 / 16)
give all those cranky uptight men massive headaches.  I'll hide the Aleve.  

The country, and Western social mores generally, have changed enormously in just a decade or so.  It's time to make our laws reflect that reality.


"Fighting Fascism is Always Cool." -- Amsterdam Weekly, vol. 3, no. 18
(-8.50, -7.23)  


[ Parent ]
Words of wisdom from the master: (2.00 / 9)
When you come to a fork in the road, take it. -- Yogi Berra

Let's hope the Supremes figure that out.

Even if the voices aren't real, they have some pretty good ideas. -- Anonymous


[ Parent ]
The author of DOMA is against it, isn't he? (2.00 / 20)
Can't recall his name and too lazy to look, but I recall seeing him interviewed in the last year or two and saying he has changed his position completely.

Interesting bit on Tweety tonight about the north/south GOP split. The last thrashing of the anti-gay, anti-non-evangelical-christian GOP machine is going to do more damage to the Republican party than the Democrats over the next two years as it comes apart. The nation has simply moved past that position. Even in the South it is eroding, from interstate emigration, to a new youth with different values to a changing racial demographic.

I have hopes for the SCOTUS sessions in March. If not this time, though, the next time it will be over.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
I know that one of the guys who pushed Prop 8 (2.00 / 19)
met some gays folks and discovered teh gays really aren't so different and ought to be allowed to be as miserable or as happy as the heteros.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette

[ Parent ]
Amazing how that works - actually meet and interact with (2.00 / 17)
people that are not just like you will show that they're not really all that different!?!?!?

[ Parent ]
this is gonna be a nail biter, seems to me. (2.00 / 25)


Nah. 5-4 or 6-3 in favor of equality. (2.00 / 27)
Roberts may join the majority (Sotomayor, Kagen, Ginsberg, Breyer and Kennedy) in order to moderate things.  Hell, both BLAG and the CA petitioners may not even be found to have standing (less likely to happen with the CA petitioners given the ruling form the CA Supremes on CA law on this).  In any case, I truly think this is a winner, and will be gobsmacked if it isn't.  Kennedy has been a consistent supporter of gay rights, having authored the two main doctrinal cases on the application of Equal Protection to gays -- Roemer and Lawrence.  I think that it is a slam dunk (I hope!).

I am for the individual over government, government over big business and the environment over all. -- William O. Douglas

[ Parent ]
I should add that Boies and Olsen (2.00 / 24)
have pitched thier argument in the PropHate case directly to Kennedy from Day One.  They knew that he was the key vote.

I am for the individual over government, government over big business and the environment over all. -- William O. Douglas

[ Parent ]
when those two (2.00 / 23)
joined forces I felt better about the prospects for equality than I had in a very long time. I think Roberts will join the majority because he really doesn't want to be vying with Taney for that honor. His vote on the ACA confirmed for me his standing means more to him than his sponsors.  

There's nothing like eavesdropping to show you that the world outside your head is different from the world inside your head.--Thornton Wilder

[ Parent ]
I find so much hope & poetry in Boies & Olsen uniting in this (2.00 / 16)
fight for equality, arguing TOGETHER at the Supreme Court, 13 years after the debacle that found them on opposing sides of Bush v. Gore. I agree with you about Roberts, and am cautiously optimistic in predicting champagne showers this June. Followed by a heavy deluge of wedding planning!

Ho'oponopono. To make things right; restore harmony; heal.

[ Parent ]
Note to all the two-women couples (2.00 / 17)
planning on getting married:  I make dresses.  I'd be thrilled to make your coordinating wedding dresses.

I have very high hopes for this case coming out the correct way.  My nephew and his boyfriend just might tie the knot themselves someday, and I want them to have the same rights nationwide that my husband and I do.  



"Fighting Fascism is Always Cool." -- Amsterdam Weekly, vol. 3, no. 18
(-8.50, -7.23)  


[ Parent ]
From your keyboard ... (2.00 / 22)
I do hope you are right about this.  I do think that Roberts is smart enough to realize that he upholding DOMA would put him on the wrong side of history.

[ Parent ]
May you be right and this not smack your gob (2.00 / 8)
:petitions CeilingCat:

[ Parent ]
Obviously I want DOMA gone (1.83 / 12)
And I strongly support recognizing gay marriage.  I'm just not sure that SCOTUS recognizing a right to marry one of the same gender (when only a tiny handful of states have recognized it at the ballot box) is the right way to do this.

We're winning this argument through the political process.  There is some risk in (as a political question, not one of policy) judicial fiat ending the debate before we hit critical mass.  Yes, it's the right thing to do, and yes demographics work heavily in our favor.  All that said, I dunno.

The aggrieved pro-life movement, vis a vis Roe v. Wade (and Casey et al) gives me pause.  Another two or three years would see perhaps another dozen states recognize gay marriage at the ballot box.  At that time there would be far less argument of judicial fiat.

I'm not saying I don't want the court to strike down Proposition 8.  I'm just wondering if this is the best way to win and have it work out well.


Maybe it's more like Brown v. Bd. of Education (2.00 / 16)
and related cases.


"Most people worry about their own bellies and other people's souls when we all ought to worry about our own souls and others' bellies" Israel Salanter

[ Parent ]
I see it as such (1.92 / 13)
As do most everybody here, I'm sure.  Doesn't mean that those who may be about to lose on this one won't see it as disenfranchisement, tyranny of "teh gays" or whatever.

[ Parent ]
Just as many saw Brown (2.00 / 17)
as an infringement on THEIR rights.  

"Most people worry about their own bellies and other people's souls when we all ought to worry about our own souls and others' bellies" Israel Salanter

[ Parent ]
Or Loving v. Virginia (2.00 / 23)
If the Supreme Court hadn't ruled as it did in 1967, my marriage would probably have still been illegal in several states.  I got married in 1997.  In 2000, Alabama finally repealed their constitutional prohibition against interracial marriage.  Part of being one country means my marriage should not transition from valid to invalid and back if we decide to take a road trip, for pete's sake!

[ Parent ]
That really blows my mind (2.00 / 15)
when I think about it. 2000!

Shake it like a Polaroid picture.

[ Parent ]
Best of all (2.00 / 12)
40% of the people in Alabama voted to keep it in the constitution.  

Forty.  Percent.

How long do you think it would take for same sex marriage equality to win over those folks?  They can't even wrap their minds around an interracial couple in this day and age.


[ Parent ]
In 1991 I had a party at my house in South Carolina before moving back to Toronto. (2.00 / 9)
Following up with my replacement at GE the following Monday he told me that a good friend from work who had been there just could not shut up, telling folks: "I was at Chris' house on Saturday and there was a black man there with a white woman!!! In his house!!!

And before anyone gets too smug about where they live being immune to such things, the following year at a wedding in Canada (not interracial) a Canadian friend blurted out that black people shouldn't be allowed to marry white people...

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Last year half of Republicans in MS (2.00 / 8)
said Blacks and Whites should not be allowed to marry

"Most people worry about their own bellies and other people's souls when we all ought to worry about our own souls and others' bellies" Israel Salanter

[ Parent ]
While looking at the worst offenders is important, (2.00 / 8)
it is equally important to give it context.

From 2007:

In the mid-1970s, 55 per cent of Canadians approved of marriage between blacks and whites, while 40 per cent of Americans thought the same way. By 1990, 78 per cent of Canadians accepted interracial marriage -- roughly the same proportion as Americans today -- while just 48 per cent of Americans were willing to give their blessing.

Another way to say that, is:

"By the mid-70s, 45% of Canadians disapproved of blacks marrying whites." I moved to Canada in 1978, where I saw more overt racism than I had experienced in the US.

West Chicago Jr. High had a significant Mexican population but I don't recall many slurs. One white friend there used the term "beaners" a lot - and while I don't cut him total slack in retrospect he was a class clown and called himself a "stupid Swedish meatball" and later married a Mexican girl.

In Toronto I learned the term "Paki" and had to ask what people were talking about (it applied to Pakistanis, Indians and pretty well anyone else brown). Lots (and lots) of white kids not only used the term all the time but vocally hated non-whites of almost every stripe. I have only heard the term "sand-ni###r" (sorry to be a prude caucasian, but I just can't type that fucking word) in Canada, and have heard it from a Canadian friend as recently as four months ago.

The nature of racism in Canada is not my real point here, however (though it is a discussion that bears consideration). Rather that there is a glass-house/thrown-stones aspect to this kind of conversation about Southern Racism, and that those who would try to improve the situation need to think beyond cliches.

Racism expresses itself in many forms. While there almost definitely is ground truth in the South being more racist than the North, I tend to agree to an extent with the Southern commentary that Northerners are more apt to deny racist thoughts they actually do have. Mentally adding a few percentage points to stats about northern/Canadian/European racism in relation to southern is probably a safe bet. At best, we all live in places and have families which have gone in living memory from being more racist to less, but which today are still far above zero.

As with north/south comparisons, it is also important to keep in mind that this is not only an issue to pick on white folks for. A Gallup poll on the subject shows some of the detail, and while being more open-minded on the topic black folks have statistically held similar views and followed a similar learning curve as white folks:

To Brit's point about cohesion, it is important if Dems want to re-win the South to be thoughtful how they talk about this issue.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
This reminds me of a quote I read (2.00 / 8)
from a rather poor representative of New England liberalism:

Bigotry in this country will never end until all those dumb White southerners get something through their thick ivory skulls

It is certainly true that the proportion of the population holding racist views varies by region in the USA (and by country, worldwide) there are racists and non-racists everywhere.  

"Most people worry about their own bellies and other people's souls when we all ought to worry about our own souls and others' bellies" Israel Salanter


[ Parent ]
That is just gross. (2.00 / 6)
It leaves me almost speechless.

Shake it like a Polaroid picture.

[ Parent ]
This thread had me curious about how that vote broke down along racial lines. (2.00 / 5)
An interesting county is Pickens, where the demographics are:

White Population: 11,332 (57.3%)
Black Population: 8,400 (42.5%)

which makes it a county with much higher than average (26%) black population.

And the vote result for Amendment 2 to repeal prohibition on interracial marriage was about:

62% No
38% Yes

I cannot find specifics, but it would be an interesting metric. Was it all the white folks plus a few black folks? Based on other stats it would seem likely to be somewhat comparable but with a higher percentage white folks voting No, but it would be an interesting set of numbers.

A HuffPo article from March 2012 shows that 29% of Mississippi GOP likely voters think it should be illegal which, while not good in a vacuum, is a remarkable metric from where it likely was ten and twenty years ago among these same individuals.

This is the best chart I've seen on the topic, though. This is the kind of change all social justice efforts should see over time:



John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Not that I'm OCD or anything... (2.00 / 5)
but these are truly lovely trendlines.

From the Sept 2011 Gallup Poll.

The "X" chart above can be extended a bit further with this data, to show a gain of 9% among white folks in the four years between 2007 and 2011:

That's a bit less than 2% per year, which would indicate 86% today and pushing as close to 100% as it is likely to ever get in the next decade. You can see the generational shift as well when you look at the numbers:

Millenials already don't give a rat's ass (97%). As a lesson to how even people with foolish ideas can learn, Boomers are now 88% and the Greatest Generation has gone from 4% to 66%.

While the South is still willing to admit to a problem, what was likely near 100% opposition sixty years ago is now 21% or less. Conservatives not surprisingly show poorly in comparison to liberals and moderates, but again even there the vast majority have gotten over race issues to the point of being fine with interracial marriage (which, as silly as it may sound saying here, was the ultimate racist trigger not very long ago).

Such a short time, such a big change. I really don't think most folks are really aware how recently things were so terribly wrong, and how far we have come.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Meh (1.78 / 9)
Who cares if the bigots are butthurt about the way it went down?

Howard Dean is my guy. (in a strictly nonsexual fashion)

[ Parent ]
i see what your saying (2.00 / 23)
...and i'm not arguing, but how critical does our mass need to get?

While about half of the country supports the legalization of same-sex marriage, supporters are not evenly distributed. Based on Pew data, a majority favor same-sex marriage in New England, in the mid-Atlantic states and along the Pacific Coast. In the Midwest and the south Atlantic states, opinion is closely divided, but in the central South, a majority opposes same-sex marriage.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12...

how do we start chipping away at the 'central south' without those folks digging in their heels any more than they already do?  it's hard to say 'just wait' to folks who want basic equality, even though I recognize that real change takes a really, really long time.

http://www.motleymoose.com/sho...


Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
I don't have good answers for you (1.93 / 14)
This is a mess.  The moral imperative is clear (to me, at least).  I'm just wondering where we'll be in twenty years if the necessary catharsis (or whatever you wanna call it) doesn't precede the national redefinition/expansion/whatever of marriage.  I'm not concern trolling.  I just don't know how this plays out.

That said, the human cost of asking people to wait for justice, to defer the pursuit of happiness, well that's rather high.  It's also easy enough for me, a straight and married man, to ask of others.  I see that.

At the very least I think we should be cognizant of the risks of victory in this particular venue.


[ Parent ]
your point is well-made, and well-taken (2.00 / 16)
it's why i preferred the longer, slower path that was taken with respect to DADT.  DOMA is a taller order obviously, as it's not tied to an institution where you can work to get buy-in from 'stakeholders'.

i know you're no concern troll, i'm just fleshing out thoughts is all.

:)

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
I'm not concern trolling. I (1.00 / 6)
I kinda think you are.

Howard Dean is my guy. (in a strictly nonsexual fashion)

[ Parent ]
Not sure that's fair. (2.00 / 11)
I think we'd all agree that we'd love it if voters passed SSM laws in their states but I think most of us will take a decision via the courts (a la Iowa, IIRC) that has the same legal effect.  That will somehow either delegitimize (is that not a word?) otherwise legal SSM in public opinion and/or harden opinion against SSM by those so inclined isn't an issue for me but it might be worth some consideration by others.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette

[ Parent ]
Minority rights shouldn't be subjected to voting by majority. (2.00 / 12)
Isn't that an essence of democracy?

[ Parent ]
Absolutely. (2.00 / 9)
But that doesn't mean that there can't be some discussion about how decisions made by courts play in public and/or policy.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette

[ Parent ]
Good to see ya, louis... (2.00 / 8)
your voice is missed when you drop off the radar.

Hope you and yours are well!  :)

Photobucket


[ Parent ]
Kysen thanks for the note. (2.00 / 7)
Sorry for dropping off the radar. I always lurk. However there are some work related restrictions on what i can post.

[ Parent ]
hatch act? (2.00 / 6)
fine.  let's talk about secret rockets.  ;)

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
Haha.....how about the new air force mini space shuttle? ;) (2.00 / 6)


[ Parent ]
any thoughts on dryden becoming armstrong? (2.00 / 5)
(i think i prefer dryden)

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
I am not in favor of renaming existing facilities already honoring (2.00 / 7)
someone in favor of somebody else e.g, lewis to glenn et al. Maybe NASA should name the first moon base after Armstrong..that would be a more befitting tribute.

[ Parent ]
I agree with that (2.00 / 8)
It pissed me off no end that they took Washington's name off of National Airport to put Reagan's on.  It would have pissed me off no matter whose name it was.  It was the principal of the thing.

Moonbase Armstrong sounds better than Moonbase Alpha too.


[ Parent ]
In my family, we still call in National :) n/t (2.00 / 10)


Photobucket

[ Parent ]
The short answer is: I thought lojasmo was a bit dismissive. (2.00 / 8)


"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette

[ Parent ]
I would be touchy too if someone suggested that my rights to equality (2.00 / 6)
under constitution should be subjected to a majority voting otherwise it's too messy.

[ Parent ]
I'll give you that. (2.00 / 7)
And perhaps your comment is the more constructive way to say it.

(And maybe I'm just being overly sensitive because the original comment was addressed to someone very new to the site who might get the wrong impression.)

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette


[ Parent ]
You mean Reaper? We all like him here. (2.00 / 7)
He has been with the site since its inception...

[ Parent ]
Yeah, Reap's an old fart... ;~) (2.00 / 5)
Good to see you, Loowee!

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."

[ Parent ]
Well hell. (2.00 / 8)
Apparently then he's another who "lurks because he cares."

Imma gonna butt out now.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette


[ Parent ]
I'd like for your butt to stay put.../grin (2.00 / 7)
Kidding aside, I always appreciate your input, Happy...would rather have you in the conversation than not.  :)

Photobucket

[ Parent ]
Heh. my butt tends to go where I go. :) (2.00 / 9)
And you should know any threat to shut up doesn't last long.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette

[ Parent ]
Just a conversation..no need to go anywhere.. (2.00 / 6)


[ Parent ]
lojasmo was more brusque than he needed to be.... (2.00 / 11)
but...Reaper can take the heat. He is not new to the site, he is actually one of the original founding members (one of our Prodigal Moose).

I get what Reaper is saying...and it is a sad reality of our current political and sociological make-up (probably wrong word there, but I'm too tired to think of a better one) that what he is saying IS a factor. It IS something to look at and discuss. It does not make it the ideal in a perfect world (or a perfect democracy) but, when have we ever lived in either?

I ALSO get why lojasmo and others might take offense to the discussion. In a perfect world...a perfect democracy (and, yes, a JUST world)...this would not be an issue at all (for the courts or otherwise). I would love it if the transition to equal rights for all citizens was a smooth and quick path...but, I'm just not pollyanna'ish enough to believe it will be.

TBH, I am astonished at how far, in how such a very short time frame, LGBT rights have come. I am not 'old'...my high school graduation would have been in '86...but, the change in the way the 'public at large' views and accepts LGBTs is freaking amazing to me. In my school days, there was LITERALLY not a single out person...not a one. Now? Kids are out in elementary school...there are LGBT Support groups IN SCHOOL...kids today (for the most part) accept it as completely normal (which it IS). That is in (what is to my mind) a very short period of time.

One can now serve openly in our military. That makes me exceedingly proud of my country. And, yes, DOMA will fall...it is inevitable...and THAT makes me proud as well. We are moving forward, and no, not as quickly as I would like...but, the big picture is rather astounding. We already know the end result...it is inevitable. We just have to work together to get there as quickly and cleanly as possible.

Sorry for the ramble, but that is my take...for what it is worth (probably not much, but it is what it is).


Photobucket


[ Parent ]
We've come a long way on many fronts, which is worth remembering. (2.00 / 10)
Actually, the story during my own time on this planet is startling to look at.

I was born in '65 and there were Whites Only bathrooms likely within a few miles of where I live now. Homosexuality was illegal in every state. If my parents had used a condom in 1962 when my brother was conceived they could have been arrested.

When I was five years old Connecticut would deny a driver's license to a gay man. /gobsmacked

When I was 8 (1973), the Texas legislature created a special law to keep homosexuality illegal after allowing straight couples have anal sex and to give each other head ("a Texas blowjob was illegal in 1972" - that doesn't even sound like a coherent sentence). There are straight 57-year-olds around today who may have criminal records for going down on another consenting adult... /dumbfounded

When I was 21, the Supreme Court upheld the right for states to legally prosecute people for their sexuality.

In 2003, when I was 38 and my youngest daughter was 1, the Supreme Court finally struck down laws against homosexuality that still existed in 13 states. /holycrap

.sigh.

Good god, what a long strange trip it's been. But a journey it has been, in one direction, and the end state is inevitable.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
I think one liners containing a personal attack (2.00 / 7)
Are all a bit 'meh'

If there was a wider argument there, put like Louis put it, and not just dismissing the comment of one Moose, then Iojasmo would have got a fierce from me.

And no way is Reaper a concern troll. That's just wrong. He was one of the founding group of the Moose, and precipitated the exodus from MYDD.  

The p***artist formerly known as 'Brit'


[ Parent ]
It's an essence of OUR democracy (2.00 / 7)
but not of democracy more generally.  In ancient Athens, even if you were one of the small number of citizens (that is a male born of Athenian parents and not a slave) the assembly could do just about anything to you, without appeal.  

"Most people worry about their own bellies and other people's souls when we all ought to worry about our own souls and others' bellies" Israel Salanter

[ Parent ]
Definitively not. (2.00 / 11)
Reaper is outrageously not a troll.

He raises a real point, and one not perhaps likely to be brought up. We all - Reaper included, as he said - want the win, that isn't an issue. But looking past that to the ramifications is what helps us avoid (or at least deal with) unexpected downsides like Prop 8. If folks on the CA left had taken exactly the sort of longer view that Reaper is bringing up they might not have been sitting on their hands while the anti-equality minority pumped millions of dollars into destroying the hopes of thousands of otherwise happy Californian couples.

I think he is right, too.

If we win this one we should be prepared for an extreme reaction from the Tea Party Right. Some actual violence isn't even too far out of the conceivable to prepare for.

Loves ya, lojasmo, but your concern for trolls here is misplaced. We assume good intentions and start from there, and we are very rarely wrong.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Yeah. Thanks Blask. (2.00 / 9)
As to the troll thing....I seem to recall fomenting (to some extent) our exit from Jerome's good graces.  No matter.

Orthodoxy is a dangerous thing.  It worries me.  Tactical caution is not necessarily strategic defeat.


[ Parent ]
Yeah, you've always been a shit-disturber... ;~) (2.00 / 7)
I think Jerome was pretty well sick of all of us by that point, but I know you got on his nerves something fierce. We're facebook friends now, it's easier that way. :~)

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."

[ Parent ]
who the fuck is jerome? (2.00 / 7)
lulz

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
heh n/t (2.00 / 8)


"If you're in a coalition and you're comfortable, you know it's not a broad enough coalition"

Bernice Johnson Reagon


[ Parent ]
The guy who owes me a drink before Brit and Blasky put a kibosh into my plan! (2.00 / 6)


[ Parent ]
those folks (2.00 / 14)
haven't gotten over the Civil War and you expect them to accept changes from the 21st century?

There's nothing like eavesdropping to show you that the world outside your head is different from the world inside your head.--Thornton Wilder

[ Parent ]
well, no. (2.00 / 14)
...and that's the problem.  demographics will solve that problem eventually as most of the crusty old bigots dies off, but equality shouldn't have to be 'waited for' either.

sometimes, i think it's an issue of familiarity.  it's easier for people to say 'god hates fags' or even 'marriage is betweeen a man and woman only' when they think of them as 'other' -- that is to say, when they don't personally know anyone who is openly LGBT.  i have some anecdotal experience with this.  a guy i went to high school with was always what i'd classify generously as 'anti-gay', at least up until he ran into an old classmate of ours (sadly, at the wake for a mutual friend).

This guy and I were really pretty good friends with a girl named Alice.  They hadn't seen eachother in ages.  Well, Alice is now Alex.  Alex is a bnoy now.  And he's married.  To a girl.  You can imagine, this was a lot for this guy from my tiny litle rural town to take in, but he did, and he did it gracefully.  Why, because he saw first hand that Alex wasn't really any different.  The junk in his trunk, and who he loved and shared his bed with didn't matter.  The whole thing changed him.  This is a guy who went from having to have cool down periods if he thought maybe someone who might maybe be gay was 'checking him out' to someone who called me asking how he could help defeat prop h8.

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
yeesh (2.00 / 11)
sorry, this comment is a hot mess of typos.

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
Re the central south: (2.00 / 10)
There are no good answers.  Some of that is the demographics of age.  Some of that is education, urbanization, in-migration, etc.  All of these are things that take decades of glacial movement.  That's time wasted for too many loving couples who just want the same civil rights I enjoy in my marriage.

Even after Brown v. Board, the central Deep South resisted integration violently.  The violence may be lacking this go-round, but I expect there will be sharp resistance.  But they are on the wrong side of history, again, and I for one am not interested in letting them hijack the nation's conscience on this issue.

I hope SCOTUS does the right thing on this case.  And then, if things get fugly in Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Arkansas, I hope the DoJ does their job.  


"Fighting Fascism is Always Cool." -- Amsterdam Weekly, vol. 3, no. 18
(-8.50, -7.23)  


[ Parent ]
works for me. (2.00 / 6)


Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
I see what you are saying, although (2.00 / 16)
I don't agree.  But, the real crunch will come when the Court takes up a case challenging Section 2 of DOMA.  Section two grants states the right to not recognize gay marriages.  It is based on the (to me) ridiculous assumption that the Full Faith & Credit Clause. That clause reads:
Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.

It is the second sentence which (supposedly) provides a grant of power to Congress to permit states to not recognize gay marriages.  But, that is an extremely stretched interpretation of that part of the clause.  In most scholarship, this sentence does not constitute a grant of power to define what states may refuse to do in recongizing its others public acts.  Instead, it simply grants Congress the authority to set up standards of proof for the proving of those acts in the competent court of another jurisdiction (for example, Congress could mandate the template for death certificates to be accepted for probate purposes in another state).

I am for the individual over government, government over big business and the environment over all. -- William O. Douglas


[ Parent ]
I would like for someone to maybe address what this does to (2.00 / 15)
states where SSM is now illegal either via direct voting or legislatively.  If DOMA going down helps us with either of those I'll take that as a win.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette

[ Parent ]
Well, I would think that with DOMA out of the way (2.00 / 13)
Someone who was legally married in one state who then moved to another state that didn't recognize the union would have standing to sue to force recognition under the full faith and credit clause.  But IANAL and am probably talking out of my hat.

[ Parent ]
Full faith and credit is a little bit more limited by that. (2.00 / 4)
Using divorce as an example, up until a couple of years ago, New York still lacked no-fault divorce.  It was, as I understand, the only state without no-fault divorce, or at least the only big state.  To get a divorce in New York, a person had to go to a judge and explain why the marriage was irreparable - invariably, everyone filed under "irreconcilable differences" because meeting that standard is so easy to do.  But you still had to explain, you couldn't simply go sign your names and be divorced.  The judge still had to approve, even though everyone knew that the answer would never be "no."

After that long vignette - full faith and credit means that, if I lived in New York, married someone, moved to Oregon, got a no-fault divorce, and then returned to New York, New York State would have to accept that divorce, even though no-fault divorce was still illegal in NYS.

In that situation, I couldn't force NYS to allow no-fault divorce for everyone, but I could force them to treat me as a divorced person and, when necessary, recognize and enforce anything deriving from the divorce (e.g. child custody, if the NYS court ever gained jurisdiction over it, a totally different kettle of fish).


[ Parent ]
the california experience has been painful. (2.00 / 15)
Proposition 22 in 2000 defined marriage as between one man and one woman.  It basically reinforced CA law at the time as I understand it.  This proposition was challenged in court, and the CA supreme court found it unconstitutional in 2008, an event that led to Proposition 8, which amended the state constitution.  Both of these propositions passed public vote with solid majorities (prop 22 with over 60%, prop 8 with more than 52%).  It is easy to say prop 8 would not pass today, but that's in view of the disaster of having already passed it once.  

[ Parent ]
Probalby not in either of the cases which the Court (2.00 / 14)
will be deciding.  Those are based on 14th Amendment - Equal Protection grounds.   The DOMA case only challenges Section 3 of DOMA, which is the Federal definition of marriage.  The recognition of "foreign" marriages (meaning those done in another state) is a matter for determination under the Full Faith & Credit Clause, specifically, whether Section 2 of DOMA is Constitutional.

I am for the individual over government, government over big business and the environment over all. -- William O. Douglas

[ Parent ]
Yeah, I've actually thought that a situation where (2.00 / 2)
DOMA is thrown out or limited on § 2 grounds (thanks for letting me look smart, I never remember where full faith & credit IS) but the Prop 8 case is lost is possible.  I doubt it's the most likely, I think that this case is ripe to being tried ideologically.  But... legally, it's certainly possible.

So, I'd kind of like to read something into them being heard on the same days.  But, that's silly of me - even if we lose both cases, they do still involve some similar law, even if it's not 100% overlapping.


[ Parent ]
They've gone there before. (2.00 / 2)
Loving v. Virginia (yes, really, the plaintiff was named "Loving.")  It's not so much a right to marry as it is a right against discrimination.  And, as is now widely known, the case has been argued in a way to appeal directly to Justice Kennedy,

The pickle is the level of scrutiny applied, but my personal feeling is that level of scrutiny has become less important lately.  Rationality review has really proved to have some teeth at times.

Beyond predicting that Alito, Scalia and Thomas are beyond reach, I am really not going to make other predictions.  It's not that I like Roberts but he has certainly proven himself to be pragmatic at times, and Kennedy seems to take seriously his role as an arbiter amongst "sides."

The problem with Roe, which I think we have to be better at acknowledging, is that the right to privacy is really difficult to find in the Constitution and thus easy for opponents of Roe to limit, when there is no solid written provision about a non-criminal law right to privacy.  There should be one, but there should be a lot of things in the world.

If I were king of the world, I would rather see a First Amendment line of cases that allowed a court to test a law to see whether it's primary purpose was to circumvent the Establishment Clause, to basically create an established church (to abuse the 1a language) by legislative means.  Unfortunately, well, that whole "king of the world" thing hasn't worked out. :)


[ Parent ]
If you oppose marriage equality you are a bigot (2.00 / 14)
pure and simple.

There's no other explanation.


"Most people worry about their own bellies and other people's souls when we all ought to worry about our own souls and others' bellies" Israel Salanter


Although my brother and his wife would disagree and cite the Bible. (2.00 / 10)
:)

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette

[ Parent ]
Which citation in the Bible? (2.00 / 11)
There are so many different forms of marriage cited in the various books of the Old Testament!  ;-D


"Fighting Fascism is Always Cool." -- Amsterdam Weekly, vol. 3, no. 18
(-8.50, -7.23)  


[ Parent ]
Which is why we don't talk religion when we're together. :) (2.00 / 10)
Although they pray daily (if not hourly) for my soul.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette

[ Parent ]
Biblical bigotry is still bigotry (2.00 / 7)
Pretty much everything has been justified by the Bible.  

"Most people worry about their own bellies and other people's souls when we all ought to worry about our own souls and others' bellies" Israel Salanter

[ Parent ]
Including slavery and segregaton. (2.00 / 8)


I am for the individual over government, government over big business and the environment over all. -- William O. Douglas

[ Parent ]
Sure, as well as violent abolitionism and relative neutrality on slavery (2.00 / 9)
As my dad used to say "People aren't rational animals, they are rationalizing animals". We figure out ways to support our views.  

"Most people worry about their own bellies and other people's souls when we all ought to worry about our own souls and others' bellies" Israel Salanter

[ Parent ]
So what I've never quite understood... (2.00 / 2)
And I don't mean this to be snarky or judgmental - I literally don't understand it.

Christians believe that the coming of Jesus released the faithful from the Old Testament laws.

So just what laws are the faithful released from?  All 613 commandments as described in the Shulchan Aruch?  The Leviticus codes?  The 10 commandments?  Everything?  What is their position on this?

I really wish that I could understand this stuff.


[ Parent ]
I think it's most excellent that the Supreme Court is taking (2.00 / 14)
this up!  Just as long as they decide in the correct manner!!  And that would be 2 consentual (sp??) adults, as I've not figured out how all the legal stuff for more than 2 people would work.

Good Morning America cast publicly announced their weather person's marriage with a photo of both men together.  Pretty gutsy on their part.  But, Sam sure did look happy this morning.

Ok.. Introductions - I've got the same name as what I use over at the orange place.  I recognize some of the user names here already from the same place.  I've read the 'rule book' and hope I don't make too many mistakes!


Welcome to the Moose, nchristine! (2.00 / 8)
Have you read the unofficial guide as well? There are a few more tips to be found that will make for an easy transition to the Moose.

Insider's Guide to Motley Moose

There are few more tips in JanF's most recent diary and even more can be found in the Open Thread: Q&A diaries.

Just relax and know you are amongst friends (many of whom I'm sure you recognize).

/grin

Photobucket


[ Parent ]
more and more public figures and (2.00 / 11)
performers are making those announcements and/or coming out, which I see as good. It puts the question in the public mind, and the more often people hear about it, the less shock value it has and the more they get used to the idea.

Just the fact that the issue can be discussed publicly in this country is, as others have noted, a huge improvement. Eventually, the US will be dragged, kicking and screaming perhaps, into the 20th century.

Even if the voices aren't real, they have some pretty good ideas. -- Anonymous


[ Parent ]
I see what you did there... (2.00 / 7)
:~)

I agree, it comes up time and time again. It's like traveling: it is easy to be prejudiced about people you have never met.

We have been through this before in other contexts. The black/white racial thing was easier to maintain when we lived apart. Contact was limited and restricted to defined circumstances.

My Grandmother remembered her father talking over the fence with the father of the black family next door who worked the next sharecrop plot in Florida a hundred years ago, but they never had dinner together. She didn't play with their children. Even in poverty, the invisible line separated.

I have been developing a rant which I may try to put in words here sometime without offending too many boomers, but it circles around the differences in how we view things generationally. Growing up in different conditions we by nature just see things through different lens'. As an Oldest Gen Xer, the memes that the Boomers created were the old accepted background for me and anyone younger.

As I have noted in this thread, losing gay prejudices is something that I saw happening in myself in my own youth, while racial prejudices were never something I had to unlearn. Many in my generation, however, still needed to get over the first black executive/Mayor/Senator and vocal groups like the Black Panthers (go Dee! ;~) were necessary to force people to confront the error of their thinking.

While ultimately we need to get beyond people needing to "come out" - because in the end, wtf right do we have to ask others to share personal information? - right now it is important that the people who fear non-heterosexuality to know that they already have gay friends and family. Sexuality isn't skin color so it isn't always so obvious, so it requires folks to come to love Ellen or the guy at work or their cousin or uncle, knowing they are not straight.

What we are seeing is that more and more people just don't give a damn anymore. Younger folks don't give a damn to begin with, and many older folks love Ellen. Another generation down the road and there won't be any need for anyone to make a big deal out of communicating their sexuality.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Search




Advanced Search
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Blog Roll
Angry Bear
Angry Black Lady
Balloon Juice
Black Kos
Booman Tribune
Charles P. Pierce
Crooks and Liars
Daily Kos
Five Thirty Eight
Huffington Post
Juan Cole
Maddow Blog
P.M. Carpenter
Political Wire
RumpRoast
Scholars & Rogues
Smartypants
Stonekettle Station
Talking Points Memo
The Field
Washington Monthly
Wonkette
Moose With Blogs
Atdleft
Barr
BorderJumpers
BTchakir
Canadian Gal
Charles Lemos
Cheryl Kopec
Curtis Walker
Douglas Watts
Hubie Stubert
Intrepid Liberal
ItStands
Janicket
JoeTrippi
John Allen
LibraryGrape
MichaelEvan
National Gadfly
Peter Jukes
Senate Guru
Zachary Karabell




Back to Top

Posting Guidelines  |  FAQ  |  Privacy Policy  |  Contact the Moose  |  Contact Congress
Powered by: SoapBlox