Supreme Court denies gay marriage appeals

[musiclady]

If two people who love each other is such a concern to you, then as I said, I can't speak for you nor offer any advice.  But that's really not an issue of such importance to me.  The world may well be moving toward cataclysm, and gay marriage ain't gonna be the cause.

I disagree, MAC.  It's certainly not the only cause, but it's part of the cause.

Look at our "president."  He believes fully in the leftist philosophy that is ripping our country apart from within.  As a result, he has no moral compass...... no sense of right or wrong.  And through his lack utter lack of leadership and lack of moral core, the world has no leadership from America.

I certainly don't believe that homosexual marriage is the cause of America's disintegration in the world, but it's also not unrelated.

[Fishrrman]

"Homosexual marriage" is, and will always be, an oxymoron, a fantasy.

Fishrrman's credo:
"Reality is what it is. It is not what we believe it to be."

[MACVSOG68]

I disagree, MAC.  It's certainly not the only cause, but it's part of the cause.

Look at our "president."  He believes fully in the leftist philosophy that is ripping our country apart from within.  As a result, he has no moral compass...... no sense of right or wrong.  And through his lack utter lack of leadership and lack of moral core, the world has no leadership from America.

I certainly don't believe that homosexual marriage is the cause of America's disintegration in the world, but it's also not unrelated.

Why and how is gay marriage one of the causes of America's disintegration?  It doesn't add more homosexuals to the population, and certainly keeps them from running around spreading diseases.  I should think more monogamous
relationships would help keep America together.

[olde north church]

Why and how is gay marriage one of the causes of America's disintegration?  It doesn't add more homosexuals to the population, and certainly keeps them from running around spreading diseases.  I should think more monogamous
relationships would help keep America together.

It's killing this great nation because there is somebody, somewhere who is focused too much on someone else's life to be procreating.  That is how "Alternative Lifestyles" are taking this nation down.

[EdinVA]

Why and how is gay marriage one of the causes of America's disintegration?

I don't believe issue of gay marriage by itself is causing the disintegration of America, but it is one issue in a whole host of liberal attacks focused on dismantling federal social engineering and states rights.  Issues like education, obamacare, gay marriage, abortion clinics are really state/local issues and should be handled at the state level, that is why we have states, so they can be different if they chose.  The challenge is, the Feds have tied almost everything we do to federal dollars which makes all these issues national issues.  For example, States/localities should be able to control abortion clinics thru the licensing process, as they do with all other businesses but because federal dollars are involved it is treated as a federal issue.  The same with education, obamacare and gay marriage.  Not only are we being forced to personally and federally recognize these things we disagree with, we are also being forced to accept them and pay for them.

Gay marriage does not bother me as much as this gay adoption thing but the problem is how do you argue the point?  With all the totally dysfunctional "normal" families these days, any non-religious argument against gay adoption that I have been able to come up with is just noise.

[GourmetDan]

Gay marriage does not bother me as much as this gay adoption thing but the problem is how do you argue the point?  With all the totally dysfunctional "normal" families these days, any non-religious argument against gay adoption that I have been able to come up with is just noise.

aka, 'the slippery slope'...

[musiclady]

Why and how is gay marriage one of the causes of America's disintegration?  It doesn't add more homosexuals to the population, and certainly keeps them from running around spreading diseases.  I should think more monogamous
relationships would help keep America together.

I thought I stated my post clearly, but your question indicates that I did not.

The destruction of the moral fabric of America has many facets, all of which join together to rot America from the inside out.

Gay marriage, as I said (if you read what I said), is not unrelated.  It is not causal, but the fact that there as many people as there are in America who see no harm in it, is an indication that our social mores have declined precipitously.  It is more likely one of the results of moral decline which preceded it.

As for monogamy among homosexuals, I believe that there are statistics that indicate that it is not the norm among homosexuals, who still prefer promiscuity to relationship.

America is rotting, thanks to the left.  We have no collective morality; mutually agreed upon standards of behavior, which help create a stable society.  The family has disintegrated.  Children being raised today are essentially amoral.  And we can thank the left for doing that to America.

The so-called "marriage" of homosexuals is only a part of the entire mess.  Part of "if it feels good, do it."

But it is, as I said, not unrelated to the overall disintegration, and the lack of ability to know the difference between right and wrong.

I hope I've made myself a bit clearer.

[DCPatriot]

Has anyone stopped to think why it's THIS administration that seems hellbent and focused on gay rights?

After all, it's not like they are a sizable percentage of the overall population.  And furthermore, this administration is a 180 degree turn away from every preceding administration going back to George Washington. 

One that also is in with direct conflict with another of their chosen 'loves'...Islam, the most intolerant of homosexuality in the world.

Virtually everyone one of the current federal agencies and cabinet positions of this administration are...or were...headed by bull-dyke lesbians.

Can Barack Obama be THAT influential?   Did Joan Rivers' impulsive remark about the Obamas' sexuality a week before her death contain a kernel of truth?

...so many questions...so little time.     

[GourmetDan]

Can Barack Obama be THAT influential?   Did Joan Rivers' impulsive remark about the Obamas' sexuality a week before her death contain a kernel of truth?

Have you not noticed the lisp Bambi has on his s's?

I can't stand to listen to it...

[alicewonders]

Has anyone stopped to think why it's THIS administration that seems hellbent and focused on gay rights?

After all, it's not like they are a sizable percentage of the overall population.  And furthermore, this administration is a 180 degree turn away from every preceding administration going back to George Washington. 

One that also is in with direct conflict with another of their chosen 'loves'...Islam, the most intolerant of homosexuality in the world.

Virtually everyone one of the current federal agencies and cabinet positions of this administration are...or were...headed by bull-dyke lesbians.

Can Barack Obama be THAT influential?   Did Joan Rivers' impulsive remark about the Obamas' sexuality a week before her death contain a kernel of truth?

...so many questions...so little time.     

OMG DC - you're peering straight into my brain today - we have the same questions running through our minds.  I guess great minds think alike!   

Anyway - I think you're onto something!   

[Bigun]

Has anyone stopped to think why it's THIS administration that seems hellbent and focused on gay rights?

After all, it's not like they are a sizable percentage of the overall population.  And furthermore, this administration is a 180 degree turn away from every preceding administration going back to George Washington. 

One that also is in with direct conflict with another of their chosen 'loves'...Islam, the most intolerant of homosexuality in the world.

Virtually everyone one of the current federal agencies and cabinet positions of this administration are...or were...headed by bull-dyke lesbians.

Can Barack Obama be THAT influential?   Did Joan Rivers' impulsive remark about the Obamas' sexuality a week before her death contain a kernel of truth?

...so many questions...so little time.     

This administration has been Hell bent toward only one thing from day one And I've said so MANY times!  The WANT TO destroy the USA from within and, if you ask me, are doing a pretty damned good job of it!

[alicewonders]

This administration has been Hell bent toward only one thing from day one And I've said so MANY times!  The WANT TO destroy the USA from within and, if you ask me, are doing a pretty damned good job of it!

Right Bigun!  It's darned near time to hang the "Mission Accomplished" banner!

[Dexter]

From today in the New York Times:

Pedophilia Deserves Civil Rights, Says New York Times’ Op-Ed

The nation’s tough anti-pedophilia laws are unfair to pedophiles, according to an op-ed published by The New York Times’ editors.

“One can live with pedophilia and not act on it,” says Margo Kaplan, an entrepreneurial assistant law professor at Rutgers University, and a former lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Tragically, the roughly 1 percent of “people who are sexually attracted to children] must hide their disorder from everyone they know — or risk losing educational and job opportunities, and face the prospect of harassment and even violence,” she wrote.

Kaplan is trying to make a legal career in the regulation of expanding sexual diversity, instead of routine and lower-status practice areas, such as torts, probate, crime or copyrights. She’s focused on “legal limitations on intimate decisions, particularly the use of criminal law in areas of health and sexuality,” according to her web page.

Kaplan says civil rights law should be changed so that pedophiles are only stigmatized or denied jobs if law school graduates agree that they pose a “direct threat” to children.

That could be a bonanza for law school graduates, because they’d be paid to argue over whether the hiring of a particular pedophile for a particular job is a direct threat to particular children. “The direct-threat analysis rejects the idea that [prospective] employers can rely on generalizations; they must assess the specific case and rely on evidence, not presuppositions,” Kaplan writes.

But this shift would also be a loss for the 99 percent of non-pedophile American citizens and voters, because it would eliminate their longstanding civil right to simply and cheaply exclude pedophiles from mainstream society or from jobs near children.

That right would be handed over to the hourly-paid law school graduates, including judges, defense lawyers, arbitrators and prosecutors, if Kaplan’s career plan becomes law.

The readers’ comments about the article were generally negative.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/10/06/pedophilia-deserves-civil-rights-says-new-york-times-op-ed/

Nothing there is attempting to condone acts of pedophilia. Articles like this come from the idea that pedophiles can overcome their sexual attraction to children and be non-destructive members of society. They believe that pedophiles can and should be able to seek help for their condition without the revealing of said condition destroying their lives. I don't know how I feel about that, and I think for the safety of children these people should always be closely watched and kept away from kids, but nevertheless this is not trying to condone what pedophiles do.

[Dexter]

I'm sorry, but what does life's being short have to do with abandoning one's fundamental principles?

For me (I can't speak for anyone else), it's precisely the opposite.

If life is short, giving up on what's important in this life is the last thing we ought to be doing.

Where does keeping homosexuals from getting married rank on your list of high priority matters? Homosexuals that love each other and want to be a family are not destroying the moral fabric of this country. Consenting same sex adults being together in no way hinders your lifestyle. Homosexuals are just as capable of having loving and meaningful relationships as straight couples. It is believed that approximately 10% of the human population is homosexual. That's not an insignificant number; these people should be free to love who they want without persecution. They just want to live their lives and be accepted by the society they live in.

[MACVSOG68]

I thought I stated my post clearly, but your question indicates that I did not.

The destruction of the moral fabric of America has many facets, all of which join together to rot America from the inside out.

Gay marriage, as I said (if you read what I said), is not unrelated.  It is not causal, but the fact that there as many people as there are in America who see no harm in it, is an indication that our social mores have declined precipitously.  It is more likely one of the results of moral decline which preceded it.

If gay marriage isn't causal to the decline in America, then if it's happening at the same time, it's relationship may in fact be 0.  Since as you say there is no cause and effect relationship, then couldn't it be coincidental?

As for monogamy among homosexuals, I believe that there are statistics that indicate that it is not the norm among homosexuals, who still prefer promiscuity to relationship.

Even if that were true, which I can't argue one way or the other, then I would think we would be pressing for any solution that would increase monogamous relationships.

America is rotting, thanks to the left.  We have no collective morality; mutually agreed upon standards of behavior, which help create a stable society.  The family has disintegrated.  Children being raised today are essentially amoral.  And we can thank the left for doing that to America.

I couldn't agree more, but that amoral behavior seems to cross all sexual preference lines.

The so-called "marriage" of homosexuals is only a part of the entire mess.  Part of "if it feels good, do it."

So monogamous relationships are more harmful than no relationships?  I would have suspected that the "if it feels good, do it" scenario speaks a lot more about one night stands than it does for a lifetime commitment.

But it is, as I said, not unrelated to the overall disintegration, and the lack of ability to know the difference between right and wrong.

I hope I've made myself a bit clearer.

Absolutely.   

[Dexter]

I'm not 'getting over' these wounds to our nation.   I will always mourn what we have lost.......

Culture always changes as younger generations inherit the Earth; it has always been that way and it will always be that way. I'm sure that in my twilight years I will be seen by young people as a cantankerous old man hanging onto the past, but despite my frustrations with the way young people are changing the world I like to believe that I will still maintain my faith that they will do a good job and do humanity proud after I am gone.

[jmyrlefuller]

Where does keeping homosexuals from getting married rank on your list of high priority matters? Homosexuals that love each other and want to be a family are not destroying the moral fabric of this country. Consenting same sex adults being together in no way hinders your lifestyle. Homosexuals are just as capable of having loving and meaningful relationships as straight couples. It is believed that approximately 10% of the human population is homosexual. That's not an insignificant number; these people should be free to love who they want without persecution. They just want to live their lives and be accepted by the society they live in.

They are not capable of reproducing.

America's birth rate, outside the Hispanic population, should send blaring alarm bells that our approach to sex and marriage is broken. The association with love, feelings and attraction is cheapinging a vital part of society. It should be associated with bearing children.

Does that mean I don't believe old people should marry? Yes! There is no legal or practical reason for them to do so.

[MACVSOG68]

They are not capable of reproducing.

America's birth rate, outside the Hispanic population, should send blaring alarm bells that our approach to sex and marriage is broken. The association with love, feelings and attraction is cheapinging a vital part of society. It should be associated with bearing children.

Does that mean I don't believe old people should marry? Yes! There is no legal or practical reason for them to do so.

So if If understand you, only two heterosexuals capable of reproducing, and of course having an intent to do so, and younger than (?) should be allowed to marry? 

[musiclady]

Where does keeping homosexuals from getting married rank on your list of high priority matters? Homosexuals that love each other and want to be a family are not destroying the moral fabric of this country. Consenting same sex adults being together in no way hinders your lifestyle. Homosexuals are just as capable of having loving and meaningful relationships as straight couples. It is believed that approximately 10% of the human population is homosexual. That's not an insignificant number; these people should be free to love who they want without persecution. They just want to live their lives and be accepted by the society they live in.

You've missed the entire point.




Again.

[MACVSOG68]

I don't believe issue of gay marriage by itself is causing the disintegration of America, but it is one issue in a whole host of liberal attacks focused on dismantling federal social engineering and states rights.  Issues like education, obamacare, gay marriage, abortion clinics are really state/local issues and should be handled at the state level, that is why we have states, so they can be different if they chose.  The challenge is, the Feds have tied almost everything we do to federal dollars which makes all these issues national issues.  For example, States/localities should be able to control abortion clinics thru the licensing process, as they do with all other businesses but because federal dollars are involved it is treated as a federal issue.  The same with education, obamacare and gay marriage.  Not only are we being forced to personally and federally recognize these things we disagree with, we are also being forced to accept them and pay for them.

Gay marriage does not bother me as much as this gay adoption thing but the problem is how do you argue the point?  With all the totally dysfunctional "normal" families these days, any non-religious argument against gay adoption that I have been able to come up with is just noise.

Gay marriage was a state issue until it cleared the hurdle of the 14th Amendment.  Once a 14th Amendment claim is made, a state or jurisdiction must show a compelling interest in the alleged discrimination.  Since society has been moving more and more into favoring same-sex marriages, the courts began to challenge previously held arguments about definition, compelling interest and alternative treatment of same-sex relationships.

When I graduated from OCS, my fiancée (female version hopefully) and I could not marry in Georgia because she was of Filipino heritage.  So we drove across the state line to Alabama and it was fine there.  Ultimately the courts found that no state law against interracial marriages could support the compelling interest requirement.  Laws against selling or buying birth control, early stage abortion, school attendance, homosexual privacy and other such laws were all found to be unconstitutional. 

Were we better off back then with all those laws?  Doubt it.

[musiclady]

If gay marriage isn't causal to the decline in America, then if it's happening at the same time, it's relationship may in fact be 0.  Since as you say there is no cause and effect relationship, then couldn't it be coincidental?

Even if that were true, which I can't argue one way or the other, then I would think we would be pressing for any solution that would increase monogamous relationships.

I couldn't agree more, but that amoral behavior seems to cross all sexual preference lines.

So monogamous relationships are more harmful than no relationships?  I would have suspected that the "if it feels good, do it" scenario speaks a lot more about one night stands than it does for a lifetime commitment.

Absolutely.   

Interesting questions you ask.  It's clear you've spent some time thinking about why homosexual marriage is NOT harmful to America, nor part of the overall decline in our culture.  I'll try to deal with the issues you raise one at a time.

1.  When the discussion is about how the overall moral decline in America has harmed the country, how can the normalization of what was once understood by all/most as a perversion be in any way coincidental?  You're stretching logic to an extreme by supposing that the two subjects are not related.

2.  The fact that amoral behavior crosses over sexual 'preferences' is actually a reinforcement of my point.  The "sexual revolution" has destroyed the moral fabric of this nation, it has ruined marriages, it has ruined relationships, it has ruined health, it has spread disease, it has caused emotional trauma, it has destroyed children's lives.......  Homosexuality is only part of the mess.  That's the point I've been making all a long.

3.  I haven't got a clue as to why you asked me if monogamous relationships are more harmful than no relationships.  It's either has nothing to do with anything I've said, or is the opposite of what I've said.  In any case, there's no way to answer a question that makes no sense.

I'm going to repeat what I've said.  The 'normalization' of homosexuality is part of the destruction of the left of our culture.  This administration is gung ho in favor of it, as has been said by others above.  Homosexual marriage is part of the big picture of harming the social fabric of the nation.

AND............ legalizing homosexual marriage is opening Pandora's Box to legalizing all sorts of other sordid relationships because the boundaries that nature and nature's God set up for marriage, and understood by the Founders has now been successfully torn down.

[musiclady]

Culture always changes as younger generations inherit the Earth; it has always been that way and it will always be that way. I'm sure that in my twilight years I will be seen by young people as a cantankerous old man hanging onto the past, but despite my frustrations with the way young people are changing the world I like to believe that I will still maintain my faith that they will do a good job and do humanity proud after I am gone.

No.  Incorrect, again.

Every generation has TRIED to change everything about what they were taught.  Every generation has rebelled against its' parents.

But until the 1960's, NO generation succeeded in completely changing the moral fabric of those who preceded them.

It took baby boomers and leftists to remove the cultural standards that had always been in place and replace them with "whatever you feel like doing is OK."

And your generation has inherited the mess that the sexual revolution has wrought.  More disease, more rape, more divorce, more destroyed lives, more addiction, more hopelessness, and acceptance of all sorts of sordid behavior as "preference."

And here you are, lapping it up with a spoon........

[olde north church]

Gay marriage was a state issue until it cleared the hurdle of the 14th Amendment.  Once a 14th Amendment claim is made, a state or jurisdiction must show a compelling interest in the alleged discrimination.  Since society has been moving more and more into favoring same-sex marriages, the courts began to challenge previously held arguments about definition, compelling interest and alternative treatment of same-sex relationships.

When I graduated from OCS, my fiancée (female version hopefully) and I could not marry in Georgia because she was of Filipino heritage.  So we drove across the state line to Alabama and it was fine there.  Ultimately the courts found that no state law against interracial marriages could support the compelling interest requirement.  Laws against selling or buying birth control, early stage abortion, school attendance, homosexual privacy and other such laws were all found to be unconstitutional. 

Were we better off back then with all those laws?  Doubt it.

Epilepsy was also a reason to deny marriage.

[olde north church]

No.  Incorrect, again.

Every generation has TRIED to change everything about what they were taught.  Every generation has rebelled against its' parents.

But until the 1960's, NO generation succeeded in completely changing the moral fabric of those who preceded them.

It took baby boomers and leftists to remove the cultural standards that had always been in place and replace them with "whatever you feel like doing is OK."

And your generation has inherited the mess that the sexual revolution has wrought.  More disease, more rape, more divorce, more destroyed lives, more addiction, more hopelessness, and acceptance of all sorts of sordid behavior as "preference."

And here you are, lapping it up with a spoon........

You make it sound like perversion didn't exist before the "Summer of Love".  Incest has been around since the dawn of man, not even primates engage in it and they will hump a snake if it stops to wriggle a moment.  Homosexuality has been around for a long time two.  The Assyrians had the death penalty for two crimes, homosexuality and abortion.
The difference between "Stereopticon, hoop skirt and iced cream" America and today is people are coming forward after being buggered by the priest, coach or teacher.  Are you telling me there were no illegitimate children before 1967?  Everyone was in church on Sunday or milking cows?
Not buying it for a second.  People just didn't talk about things like that.  The girls went off to their aunt's and the boys went off to Indiannapolis for a career in interior decorating.

[musiclady]

You make it sound like perversion didn't exist before the "Summer of Love".  Incest has been around since the dawn of man, not even primates engage in it and they will hump a snake if it stops to wriggle a moment.  Homosexuality has been around for a long time two.  The Assyrians had the death penalty for two crimes, homosexuality and abortion.
The difference between "Stereopticon, hoop skirt and iced cream" America and today is people are coming forward after being buggered by the priest, coach or teacher.  Are you telling me there were no illegitimate children before 1967?  Everyone was in church on Sunday or milking cows?
Not buying it for a second.  People just didn't talk about things like that.  The girls went off to their aunt's and the boys went off to Indiannapolis for a career in interior decorating.

I think you know that I'm not saying any such thing.  (You do, don't you?)

And I know you understand that what has changed was a cultural acceptance and encouragement of things that had been previously understood as wrong in this country.  (Assyrians??  Seriously??  Oy ).

If you're over 60, you were raised in a culture that understood that sexual perversion, one night stands, dalliances outside of marriage, teen-age pregnancy were wrong.  (NOT that it didn't happen.  Yikes.  Gimme a break).

Now we've got a President encouraging it, Senators saying you should be able to marry anyone you "love."  And here we are on a conservative website having to defend basic morality in a country that depends on morality to survive......